MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405667060 · doi:10.14740/jmc4321

Anomalous Pulmonary Vein Drainage Into the Innominate Vein Diagnosed After Central Line Placement: A Case Report Along With a Review of Rare Congenital Anatomy Partial Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Return

2024· review· en· W4405667060 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chris Andraos, Sean Hormozian, Aldin Malkoc, N. Robinson, Michael Neeki, Samuel Lee, Samuel Schwartz, Keith Glover

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVeinPulmonary veinAnatomyRadiologySurgeryCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anomalous pulmonary vein drainage is a rare but clinically relevant variant of the cardiovascular anatomy. We present a case report of a 22-year-old male who was incidentally found to have anomalous pulmonary vein drainage into the innominate vein. The patient had a known history of seizures and was brought to the emergency department following a simple tonic-clonic seizure. He was subsequently intubated for airway protection and admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU). While in the MICU, a left internal jugular central venous catheter (CVC) was placed; however, post-procedural chest radiography showed the tip of the CVC in the left chest. An arterial blood gas (ABG) was concerning for arterial blood. Due to the uncertainty of line positioning, a computed tomography pulmonary angiography revealed a rare abnormal connection between the left innominate vein and the left pulmonary vein. This case underscores the importance of potential variations in pulmonary venous drainage as they may have implications for post-procedural decision-making and potentially clinical outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Cases→Same topicCongenital Heart Disease Studies→French-language works237,207→