Transcatheter Arterialization of the Deep Veins for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia: A Case Series of the Direct Cost Associated With Limb Salvage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our study aims to estimate the long-term cost of procedurally successful transcatheter arterialization of the deep veins (TADV) coupled with adjunct therapy. Patients with no conventional endovascular/open options were considered for TADV. TADV index procedure cost, cost of subsequent procedures and wound care/adjuncts were collected. Cost data were obtained from Medicare claims and other published sources. All patients in the study had limb salvage 180 days after TADV. Success was defined as lime salvage with no more than a transmetatarsal amputation of the affected limb. The average cost of the procedure was $320,850. The average hospital cost (hospitalization and wound care adjuncts) was $895,546. The overall average total cost was $1,216,396. TADV and associated multidisciplinary wound care approach for "no option" chronic limb-threatening ischemia does not appear to be a cost-effective strategy, with an average total cost of over 1 million dollars per patient.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".