Elevated Lipoprotein(a) Levels and Massive Ruptured Root and Ascending Aortic Aneurysm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rupture of a root and ascending aortic aneurysm is a rare, life-threatening condition requiring prompt recognition and surgical intervention. Elevated lipoprotein(a) levels have been implicated in vascular pathology but are less studied in thoracic aneurysms. CASE SUMMARY: A 61-year-old man who presented with severe dyspnea and chest tightness was found to have a 7.3-cm ruptured root and ascending aortic aneurysm with elevated lipoprotein(a) (233 nmol/L). He underwent emergency surgery, including a mechanical Bentall procedure, ascending aortic and hemiarch replacement, and bilateral pericardiectomy. At follow-up, he was clinically stable with a well-seated valve conduit and no complications. DISCUSSION: This case suggests a potential association between elevated lipoprotein(a) and thoracic aortic aneurysm rupture, possibly linked its proatherogenic and proinflammatory properties in vascular pathology. Further investigations are needed to clarify its role in aneurysm risk stratification. TAKE-HOME MESSAGES: Elevated lipoprotein(a) may contribute to thoracic aortic aneurysm progression. Its role in risk stratification warrants further investigation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".