Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A questionnaire was used to survey the experience of 8 Japanese institutions with percutaneous transluminal aortic valvuloplasty (PTAV) in children. Among 99 procedures reported in 88 patients, sufficient data for analysis was obtained from 76 procedures in 72 patients. In those 76 procedures the pressure gradient decreased significantly from 68+/-25 (20-140) to 33+/-22 (0-100) mmHg (p<0.01), whereas aortic regurgitation (AR) increased at least one grade in 26 cases (34%). None of the parameters analyzed in this study were predictors of an increase in AR. The reduction in pressure gradient was judged as good in 44 of the 76 procedures (58%). A larger ring diameter, larger balloon diameter and larger ratio balloon diameter/the normal predicted diameter of the aortic valve ring significantly contributed to an effective reduction of pressure gradient. Follow up data (mean interval, 4 years) was available for 26 of 39 clinically effective procedures. AR progressed at least 1 grade in 11 (42%), and the pressure gradient re-developed to more than 50mmHg in 2 cases (8%). In Japan, PTAV has been accepted as a useful procedure for valvular aortic stenosis in children, but progressive AR or re-development of the pressure gradient is not uncommon even after clinically effective PTAV.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".