A prospective observational multicenter study of balloon angioplasty for the treatment of native and recurrent coarctation of the aorta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Balloon angioplasty (BA) is an important treatment option for coarctation of the aorta. The congenital cardiovascular interventional study consortium (CCISC) represents a multi-institutional and multi-national effort to prospectively investigate congenital cardiac interventions. A prospective observational analysis of the efficacy and safety of balloon aortic angioplasty was conducted. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from 36 CCISC sites from 2004 to 2012. One hundred and thirty patients underwent BA for native (n = 76) and recurrent (n = 54) coarctation. Acute, short-term, and intermediate outcomes are described for BA performed in the setting of native and recurrent coarctation of the aorta. Outcome measures included residual upper to lower extremity blood pressure gradient (ULG), use of antihypertensive medications, aortic wall injury, reobstruction, and need for reintervention. RESULTS: There was no procedural mortality. Acutely in native and recurrent coarctation, BA achieved an ULG less than 15 mm Hg in 73-80% and to less than 10 mm Hg in 54-68% of patients, respectively. At intermediate follow-up, ULG further improved, particularly for those who underwent initial reintervention for recurrent coarctation. No significant differences in aortic wall complications were seen and intervention free survival was similar for both groups. Following angioplasty, there was no significant difference in aortic wall complications; however follow up integrated imaging decreased over time. CONCLUSIONS: BA is a safe and effective treatment for coarctation of the aorta acutely and at intermediate term. Although aortic injury occurred in patients with both native and recurrent coarctation, at intermediate follow-up, aneurysm was noted more often in those with initial intervention for native coarctation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".