MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7125877057

Use of a Fogarty balloon catheter for management of distal nasolacrimal duct atresia in a standing sedated horse.

2025· article· en· W7125877057 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Bourassi, Heather Jack, Agnieszka Florczyk

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNasolacrimal Duct Obstruction Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNasolacrimal ductBalloon dilationBalloon catheterAtresiaBalloonCatheterStent
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 4-year-old Arabian cross paint mare was referred for evaluation of chronic mucopurulent discharge and epiphora of the left eye. Ophthalmic and radiographic evaluations confirmed distal nasolacrimal duct atresia with absence of the nasolacrimal orifice. Initial minimally invasive treatments, including guidewire-assisted catheterization and diode laser photoablation, were unsuccessful. Definitive treatment was achieved using a Fogarty arterial embolectomy catheter under standing sedation. Controlled balloon inflation and deflation enabled progressive dilation of the obstructed duct, and a surgical mucosal opening over the balloon permitted creation of a nasal orifice. A temporary stent was maintained for 4 wk, resulting in successful restoration of nasolacrimal drainage without recurrence of epiphora. Twelve months after catheter removal, no recurrence of ocular discharge was noted. This case report highlights a minimally invasive, effective technique for treating distal nasolacrimal duct atresia in horses when other neocanalization methods are unsuccessful. Key clinical message: A Fogarty catheter-assisted neocanalization offered a practical and effective option for restoring nasolacrimal duct patency in a horse with distal duct atresia and absence of the nasal orifice, providing a minimally invasive alternative when conventional methods failed.

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)0.001
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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicNasolacrimal Duct Obstruction TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207