Cardiac performance and quality of life in patients who have undergone the Fontan procedure with and without prior superior cavopulmonary connection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A superior cavopulmonary connection is commonly performed before the Fontan procedure in patients with a functionally univentricular heart. Data are limited regarding associations between a prior superior cavopulmonary connection and functional and ventricular performance late after the Fontan procedure. METHODS: We compared characteristics of those with and without prior superior cavopulmonary connection among 546 subjects enrolled in the Pediatric Heart Network Fontan Cross-Sectional Study. We further compared different superior cavopulmonary connection techniques: bidirectional cavopulmonary anastomosis (n equals 229), bilateral bidirectional cavopulmonary anastomosis (n equals 39), and hemi-Fontan (n equals 114). RESULTS: A prior superior cavopulmonary connection was performed in 408 subjects (75%); the proportion differed by year of Fontan surgery and centre (p-value less than 0.0001 for each). The average age at Fontan was similar, 3.5 years in those with superior cavopulmonary connection versus 3.2 years in those without (p-value equals 0.4). The type of superior cavopulmonary connection varied by site (p-value less than 0.001) and was related to the type of Fontan procedure. Exercise performance, echocardiographic variables, and predominant rhythm did not differ by superior cavopulmonary connection status or among superior cavopulmonary connection types. Using a test of interaction, findings did not vary according to an underlying diagnosis of hypoplastic left heart syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: After controlling for subject and era factors, most long-term outcomes in subjects with a prior superior cavopulmonary connection did not differ substantially from those without this procedure. The type of superior cavopulmonary connection varied significantly by centre, but late outcomes were similar.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".