A Six-Year Experience with the Omnicarbon Valve in North American Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: We studied the results of an all-carbon monoleaflet valve prosthesis (the Omnicarbon) in a North American population. METHODS: Patients were recalled to our valve clinic for complete evaluation, including echocardiography, laboratory tests, and physician examination. This experience includes 108 Omnicarbon valve implants. We report the results of single aortic (AVR) or mitral (MVR) valve replacement. RESULTS: Patients' ages ranged from 40 to 83 (mean: 63 +/- 9 years), and most were male (60%, 59/98). Preoperatively, 71% were NYHA Classes III/IV, while most patients are now Classes I/II (86%). AVR predominated (63%, 62/98), and many patients (44%, 43/98) underwent cardiac procedures either previously or concomitant with valve replacement. Hospital mortality was 6.1% (6/98). Predicted hospital mortality using the Parsonnet additive risk model averaged 12.1%. Currently, four patients cannot be located (96% accountability). Overall, hematology indicated low hemolysis-lactate dehydrogenase: 691 +/- 184 IU/L (112%+/- 30% upper normal), reticulocytes: 1.8%+/- 0.7%, and red blood cells (10(6)/mm(3)): 4.41 +/- 0.50 (males)/4.16 +/- 0.50 (females). International normalized ratio averaged 2.67 +/- 0.72. Doppler echocardiography values were acceptable and comparable to other mechanical valves. Five-year survival (hospital death included) is 86%+/- 4%. At 5 years, freedom from any thromboembolic event is 99%+/- 1%, and freedom from bleeding is 97%+/- 2%. Endocarditis and nonstructural dysfuction also occurred at low rates (99%+/- 1% freedom at five years), and no structural failure or hemolytic anemia was observed during the 343 patient-years (mean: 3.7 +/- 1.6 years). CONCLUSIONS: Good hematology and hemodynamics, along with remarkably low complication rates, demonstrate that the Omnicarbon valve meets contemporary performance expectations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".