Impact of Norwood versus hybrid palliation on cardiac size and function in hypoplastic left heart syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The hybrid approach for hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) could theoretically result in better preservation of right ventricular (RV) function then the Norwood procedure. The aim of this study was to compare echocardiographic indices of RV size and function in patients after Norwood and hybrid throughout all stages of palliation. METHODS: 76 HLHS patients (42 Norwood, 34 hybrid) were retrospectively studied. Echocardiography was obtained before stage I, before and after stage II, and before and after Fontan. Median follow-up was 4.9 years (range 1.1-8.5). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics before stage I were similar. Hybrid patients demonstrated a significant decrease in RV fractional area change (FAC) between baseline and pre-stage II (36±9% vs 27±6%; p<0.01); Norwood patients remained stable (32±10% vs 32±7%; p=0.21). At pre-stage II, moderate/severe tricuspid valve (TV) regurgitation was found in nine Norwood (33%) and four hybrid (18%) patients (p=0.19). After stage II, the difference in FAC became insignificant (29±7% vs 25±8%, p=0.08) and moderate/severe TV regurgitation (TR) was found in 13 Norwood (48%) and four hybrid patients (19%) (p=0.18). At pre-Fontan, RV FAC was similar after Norwood and hybrid (34±5% vs 33±6%, p=0.69), which remained unchanged after Fontan. After Fontan, one Norwood and one hybrid patient had moderate TR. RV and TV size were similar for both groups at each time point. CONCLUSIONS: Patients after Norwood and hybrid procedures had equivalent indices of RV size, and systolic and diastolic function throughout all stages of palliation. Small differences in individual RV and TV indices are likely to be explained by differences in physiology or surgical timing rather than by intrinsic differences in myocardial and valve function.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".