Clinical outcomes of patent foramen ovale closure for paradoxical emboli without echocardiographic guidance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility of device closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) for presumed paradoxical emboli without echocardiographic guidance or balloon sizing and the clinical outcome after device closure. Closure of the PFO has been proposed as an alternative to anticoagulation in patients with presumed paradoxical emboli. At present, most centers perform device closure with transesophageal echocardiographic guidance and balloon sizing of the defect. Between May 1998 and April 2002, 92 consecutive patients underwent device closure for a PFO using fluoroscopic monitoring only. Procedural success and major complications were recorded. Follow-up outcomes were recurrence rate and residual atrial shunting on transthoracic echocardiography. All patients (mean age, 45 +/- 13 years; 52% male) had successful device deployment using either the CardioSeal (n = 78) and Amplatzer (n = 14) PFO occluders with no major complications. Mean procedure time and fluoroscopy time was 27 +/- 13 and 6 +/- 4 min, respectively. One patient had a residual shunt on echocardiography at 1 year. Cumulative event-free survival for recurrence of paradoxical embolus at 1 year was 97.3% +/- 1.8%. This study provides a basis for device closure of PFO becoming a safe, day-case procedure, resulting in a low rate of residual shunting and recurrent thromboembolic events.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| 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".