MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029408139 · doi:10.4103/0975-3583.91594

An alternative subcoronary implantation technique decreases the risk of complete heart block after stentless aortic valve replacement

2012· article· en· W2029408139 on OpenAlexaff
Zhigang Song, Eric J. Lehr, Shaohua Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Disease Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAortic valve replacementContext (archaeology)Aortic valveSurgeryCardiologyInternal medicineStenosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Stentless aortic valve prostheses have excellent hemodynamic profiles, but may be associated with an increased postoperative heart block when compared to conventional prostheses. AIMS: To assess the effect of an alternative subcoronary implantation technique on postoperative complete heart block (CHB) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) following aortic valve replacement (AVR) with stentless tissue valves. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A total of 130 consecutive patients undergoing AVR with stentless tissue valves by a single surgeon were studied retrospectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A stentless tissue valve was implanted into 80 patients using the conventional modified subcoronary implantation technique, and 50 patients received a stentless tissue valve by an alternative subcoronary technique in which the inflow suture line is raised at the level of right-non coronary commissure. Data were collected at the time of hospital discharge and at 6-12 months postoperatively. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Independent samples t-test was used to compare continuous variables, and categorical variables were compared with the chi-square test. RESULTS: Use of this new method reduced postoperative CHB (4.0% vs. 16.3%, P = 0.033), with fewer patients requiring PPI in the early postoperative period (6.0% vs. 18.8%, P = 0.041). Echocardiographic examination showed no differences in the effective orifice area, peak and mean aortic valve gradients, or left ventricular mass index between groups. Trivial or mild aortic regurgitation was found in 3.9% of patients with the conventional modified technique and 4.0% of patients undergoing the alternative technique, during follow-up (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the conventional subcoronary implantation technique, the alternative subcoronary implantation technique reduces the incidence of new CHB and the requirement of PPI following AVR with stentless tissue valves while preserving mid-term hemodynamic function.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.005
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiovascular Disease ResearchSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207