Experience With the Atrium Advanta Covered Stent for Aortic Obstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We sought to assess the efficacy, safety and clinical outcomes of the Advanta V12™ covered stent in management of coarctation of the aorta (CoA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Stent functionality was assessed by review of angiographic imaging, clinical data at admission, discharge and at the last clinic visit, stent configuration on chest roentgenogram, radiation exposure, and complications. RESULTS: Between October 2009 and February 2012, 17 patients underwent stent implantation. There were 9-12, 2-14, and 6-16 mm diameter stents deployed. Balloon angioplasty after implantation was required in 2 patients. Mean percent recoil in the middle of the stent for the 12, 14, and 16 mm implants was 14%, 24%, and 24%, respectively. There was improvement in CoA diameter from 6.6 ± 3.2 to 11.5 ± 1.7 mm (P<0.0001) and a reduction in the peak pressure gradient from 23.1 ± 10.1 to 0.8 ± 3.3 mmHg (P<0.0001). No patient had a symptomatic complication. Left arm cuff blood pressure fell 24 hours after implantation and left arm to leg blood pressure gradient fell to <20 mmHg in all (P<0.0001). Follow-up was a median 242 days and at the last clinic visit there were no statistically different findings from discharge. Five children (33%) required antihypertensive medications but 3 were off medication at latest follow-up. Three patients (18%) required reintervention. CONCLUSION: The implantation of the Advanta™ V12 stent for the treatment of CoA is safe and effective in the early term. However, further study is required to determine longer-term stent efficacy.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".