Outcomes in patients with pulmonary hypertension undergoing percutaneous atrial septal defect closure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine the outcomes in patients with moderate or severe pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) undergoing percutaneous atrial septal defect (ASD) closure. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Teaching hospital-based study. PATIENTS: Fifty-four patients with moderate (n = 34) or severe PAH (n = 20) who underwent successful device implantation between 1999 and 2004 were included in the study. Clinical and transthoracic echocardiographic data were reviewed. Pulmonary hypertension was classified as moderate (50-59 mm Hg) or severe (>or=60 mm Hg) according with the right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) calculated by echocardiography. RESULTS: At the early follow-up (mean (SD) 2.3 (1.2) months) all patients were alive and the baseline RVSP decreased from 57 (11) mm Hg to 51 (17) mm Hg (p = 0.003). At the late follow-up (n = 39, mean (SD) duration 31 (15) months) two patients had died and the baseline RVSP decreased from 58 (10) mm Hg to 44 (16) mm Hg (p = 0.004). Although the overall mean RVSP decreased at late follow-up, only 43.6% (17/39) of patients had normalisation (<40 mm Hg) of the RVSP and 15.4% (6/39) had persistent severe PAH. CONCLUSION: Transcatheter closure in patients with secundum ASD and PAH can be successfully performed in selected subjects and is associated with good outcomes. Early improvements in RVSP are seen in patients with moderate or severe PAH undergoing transcatheter ASD closure. Continued improvement in RVSP occurs in late follow-up. Despite decreases in the mean RVSP in late follow-up, many patients do not have complete normalisation of pressures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".