MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128996439 · doi:10.1017/s1047951104003063

Long-term outcomes after the atrial switch for surgical correction of transposition: a meta-analysis comparing the Mustard and Senning procedures

2004· review· en· W2128996439 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology in the Young · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalMeta-analysisHazard ratioSurgeryAdverse effectInternal medicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most adults with regular transposition (the combinations of concordant atrioventricular and discordant ventriculo-arterial connections) have undergone either the Mustard or Senning procedure in childhood. It is unclear whether adverse events differ according to the surgery performed. With this in mind, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare long-term outcomes. We searched systematically entries to MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from January 1966 through August 2003, supplementing the search by secondary sources. Comparative studies were required to include at least 10 patients in each cohort of Mustard or Senning procedure, and to report overall survival. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers. We used a component approach to assess quality. On the basis of assessment of heterogeneity, we then used a random-effects model for pooled analyses. In all, we included seven studies, incorporating 885 patients. We found a trend towards lower mortality for the 369 patients undergoing a Mustard procedure when compared to 474 submitted to the Senning operation, with a hazard ratio of 0.63 and 95% confidence intervals between 0.35 and 1.14 (p = 0.13). This trend increased with the size of the sample (p = 0.004). Obstruction in the systemic venous pathway was more common in those having the Mustard procedure, with a risk ratio of 3.5 and 95% confidence intervals from 1.8 to 7.0 (p < 0.001), with a trend towards greater obstruction of the pulmonary venous pathway in those undergoing the Senning procedure, 7.6% vs. 3.8% (p = 0.27). A trend towards fewer residual shunts was observed for those with Mustard baffles, 7.0% vs. 14.1% (p = 0.10). Sinus nodal dysfunction, however, was more common after the Mustard procedure. Data regarding atrial tachydysrhythmias was inconclusive. Systemic cardiac failure and functional capacity, was similar. We conclude that outcomes are not uniform among patients submitted to the Mustard and Senning procedures. Knowledge of such differences may facilitate stratification of risk and follow-up.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it