Hearts with concordant ventriculoarterial connections but parallel arterial trunks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the characteristic morphological features of hearts with concordant ventriculoarterial connections and parallel arterial trunks, and to provide unequivocally a method to describe their anatomy. DESIGN, METHODS AND PATIENTS: The entire cardiac database and cardiac pathological archive at the Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, was interrogated to identify all patients with concordant ventriculoarterial connections and parallel arterial trunks. The clinical records, autopsy reports and actual cardiac specimens of those who underwent autopsy, were reviewed. RESULTS: 8 cases meeting our criteria were identified. The infundibular anatomy was variable, including four hearts with bilateral infundibulums, three with subpulmonary infundibulums and one with bilaterally absent infundibulums. Considerable variability was also found in the type of atrial arrangement, along with the morphology of the atrioventricular junctions. The most common findings were the usual atrial arrangement (n = 5), left juxtaposition of the right atrial appendages (n = 3), an atrial septal defect (n = 6), univentricular atrioventricular connection (n = 5), ventricular septal defect (n = 8) and pulmonary obstruction (n = 4). In addition, five specimens had either a single coronary artery or two coronary arteries arising from the anticipated right coronary aortic sinus. CONCLUSIONS: Concordant ventriculoarterial connections with parallel arterial trunks can be found in a variety of segmental combinations. An accurate diagnosis of these rare hearts can be achieved by detailed analysis of not only the ventriculoarterial connections but also the infundibular anatomy and the spatial relationship of the arterial trunks. Particular attention to the coronary arteries is warranted.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".