Novel therapeutic aspects of percutaneous aortic valve replacement with the 21F CoreValve Revalving™ System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Percutaneous aortic valve replacement (PAVR) is an emerging therapy for nonsurgical patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). We investigated whether novel therapeutic approaches may facilitate AVR outcomes for high-risk patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eleven patients [n = 6 (54%) men] aged 82 +/- 10 years underwent PAVR after being refused for open surgery. The mean+/-SD AV area and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of these patients was 0.56 +/- 0.19 cm(2) and 49 +/- 17%, respectively, with severe functional limitation (NYHA class III (n = 8) and IV (n = 3)). One patient underwent PAVR combined with simultaneous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Two male patients needed left iliac artery angioplasty. A percutaneous ventricular assist device (PVAD) was used in the most recent case. Compared with pre-PAVR, mean AV area (1.3 +/- 0.4 cm(2); P < 0.001) and LVEF (56 +/- 11%; P < 0.001) increased. One man had a peri-procedural stroke and died 5 days post-PAVR. Four other patients died within 4 months of hospital discharge. The median duration of survival of the survivors was 305 (range 249-431) days. CONCLUSIONS: Novel percutaneous techniques facilitate CoreValve PAVR (21 Fr.). Future lower profile devices (e.g. 18 Fr. Generation III CoreValve) should permit inclusion of a broader spectrum of high-risk patients. PAVR may evolve toward a full percutaneous approach.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".