Aortic root distensibility and cross-sectional areas in stented and subcoronary stentless bioprostheses in pigs☆
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A flexible aortic root is essential for natural leaflet stress distribution. It is suggested that stentless bioprosthetic valves retain the flexibility of native valves. We investigated aortic root distensibility and cross-sectional area (CSA) in stentless (Solo, n=4; Toronto SPV, n=7), stented (Mitroflow, n=8) and in native valves (n=8) in pigs. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed to assess aortic root areas. At the annular level the Solo valve had a larger CSA (2.83+/-0.26 cm(2)) than both the Mitroflow (2.24+/-0.23 cm(2)) and Toronto SPV (1.87+/-0.59 cm(2)) (P=0.003; P=0.01). At the sino-tubular junction the Mitroflow valve had a significantly larger CSA (2.96+/-0.80 cm(2)) than the Toronto SPV (2.05+/-0.47 cm(2); P=0.02). At the annular level the percentage change in area between end-diastole and end-systole was lower for the Mitroflow than for all the other valves (P=0.006). No difference was found between native and stentless valves. In conclusion, the Solo valve had a larger CSA at the annulus than both the Mitroflow and the Toronto SPV. However, the stentless valves had a smaller CSA at the sino-tubular junction than the Mitroflow. We, furthermore, found that implantation of stentless heart valves preserves aortic root distensibility at the annular level in pigs.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".