Large Amplatzer atrial septal occluder in growing children: an echographic study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lesions of adjacent structures have been reported after closure of large atrial septal defects with the Amplatzer septal occluder. In children, growth of the heart should modify the initial relationship between the device and surrounding structures. AIM: To compare the relationship between large Amplatzer septal occluder and adjacent cardiac structures at short-, mid-, and long-term follow-up in at-risk paediatric population using echocardiography. METHODS: A total of 25 children (4.6±2.9 years old, 18 girls) with the largest atrial septal defect devices implanted between 1997 and 2002 were enrolled prospectively for complete echocardiogram 17.8±10.5 months (mid-term follow-up) and 8.8±0.9 years (long-term follow-up) after the procedure. RESULTS were compared with the echocardiogram carried out 2.1±3.4 days after the procedure (short-term follow-up). RESULTS: The minimal distance between the left disk and the mitral valve increased: 1.4±2.0 mm at short-term and 5.1±2.3 mm at long-term follow-up (p<0.05), leading to less contact between the disk and the anterior leaflet and less mitral regurgitation (10 at short-term, 4 at long-term follow-up, p<0.05). The number of devices straddling the aorta decreased from 17 to 12 at long-term follow-up (p<0.05). There was protrusion of disk in the venous structure in seven patients on the first echocardiogram, which disappeared at long-term follow-up. CONCLUSION: Although frequently in close contact with the aortic root, mitral valve, or venous returns, large devices tend to centre and move away from the surrounding structures, with decreased risk for long-term distortion.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".