MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 20549: Patient-Specific CT Image-Based Engineering Analysis of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement - Implications for Aortic Root Rupture

2014· article· en· W2282380623 on OpenAlexaff
Qian Wang, Caitlin Martin, Susheel Kodali, Jonathon Leipsic, Philipp Blanke, John G. Webb, Martin B. Leon, Mathew Williams, Charles Primiano, Wei Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVentricleAortic valveValve replacementCardiologyAortic rootStentRadiologyInternal medicineAortic valvuloplastySurgeryAortaStenosisAortic valve stenosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Despite the increased global experience with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), there remain major adverse clinical events. One of the most severe complications of TAVR is aortic rupture. Although several clinical risk factors of TAVR-induced rupture have been identified, the mechanisms remain largely unknown. The objective of this study was to use computational models to predict potential aortic rupture in TAVR patients. Methods: Pre-procedural CT scans of TAVR patients were used to reconstruct patient-specific finite element (FE) models, which included the aortic root, aortic leaflets, calcification, mitral-aortic intervalvular fibrosa, anterior mitral leaflet, fibrous trigones, and left ventricle. Stent deployment was simulated in a total of 25 patients to evaluate the potential for aortic rupture. Our research design consisted of two phases: Phase One, which was to develop and calibrate FE modeling techniques by retrospectively analyzing 7 Edwards SAPIEN cases with known results; and Phase Two, which was to implement the modeling methodology developed in Phase One to conduct a blind study of 18 cases from a database of 60 patients consisting of 50% rupture cases. For the blind study, FE simulations were completed by researchers blind to the clinical outcomes, and data analysis was conducted by an independent researcher. Results: Simulations correctly predicted 83% of the rupture cases. The balloon pressure at time of rupture was approximately 3.52 atm and 2.53 atm for SAPIEN 23 and 26 valves, respectively. The average contact force between the stent and native tissue was about 81N. Conclusion: Our analysis of over 18 patients suggested that the TAVR outcome could depend on the patient-specific aortic sinus shape, calcification volume, shape, location, and orientation. These results demonstrate the potential for simulation-based pre-TAVR planning tools to evaluate device performance and improve clinical outcomes.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.294
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

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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→