MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136770925 · doi:10.1177/1089253207311789

Impact of Perioperative Transesophageal Echocardiography in Aortic Valve Replacement

2007· review· en· W2136770925 on OpenAlexaff
Baqir Qizilbash, Pierre Couture, André Denault

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary bypassPerioperativeAortic valve replacementHemodynamicsCardiologyVentricular outflow tractInternal medicineVentricular outflow tract obstructionProsthesisSurgeryMitral valveStenosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is currently being used routinely during aortic valve replacement (AVR). TEE provides information that can lead to modifications of anesthetic and surgical care that leads to improved outcome. Numerous studies have shown that modifications in therapy occur from 10% to more than 40% of cases. The impact of TEE can be divided among modifications of therapy before, during, and after cardiopulmonary bypass. Before cardiopulmonary bypass, TEE can provide prognostic information, optimize hemodynamics, and diagnose conditions that were not appreciated before surgery, including patient-prosthesis mismatch. TEE can guide and modify the placement of various bypass cannulae. After bypass, TEE verifies the surgical result, rules out left and right ventricular outflow tract obstruction, and assures stable hemodynamics. Although current guidelines state that aortic valve surgery is a class IIa indication for TEE use, the authors' experience suggests that TEE should be routinely used in AVR.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.382 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Cardiothoracic and Vascular AnesthesiaSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207