MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Current status of stentless aortic xenografts

2000· review· en· W2324192717 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Saung Z. Park, Michael J. Reardon

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Cardiology · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThrombogenicityFood and drug administrationAortic valve replacementAortic valveSurgeryCardiologyThrombusInternal medicineThrombosisStenosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The introduction of the Toronto stentless porcine valve (SPV) (St. Jude, Minneapolis, MN), recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration following a 6-year multi-institutional clinical trial from 1991 to 1997, reflects an evolutionary pursuit of an ideal valve substitute, namely, low thrombogenicity, freedom from anticoagulation, durability, easy availability, resistance to infection, and easy implantability. Currently, four different types of valve replacement have been time tested: mechanical valves, cryopreserved aortic homograft, stented heterograft, and pulmonary autograft (Ross procedure), and none of the available valve substitutes meet all the criteria of an ideal valve. The mechanical valve's favorable properties of durability and easy implantability are susceptible to thrombus formation, which requires lifelong anticoagulation. Although the aortic homografts are durable, with low incidence of infection and thrombogenicity, their widespread application has been limited by the lack of availability. The pulmonary autograft, with its native aortic valve properties, has been shunned by some surgeons because it requires a demanding technical expertise in implantation and needs an allograft in the pulmonary position. Stented xenografts are characterized by "off-the-shelf" availability, freedom from anticoagulation, easy implantability, and low incidence of infection. Its major drawback has been its limited durability. Another limitation is its residual transvalvular gradient. A modified version, a stentless xenograft, has been introduced to improve hemodynamic profiles in the hope of subsequent superior structural durability and patient survival. Two valves have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration, the Toronto SPV and the Freestyle valve (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN). At The Methodist Hospital and the Baylor College of Medicine, the Toronto SPV stentless valve has been our stentless xenograft valve of choice. We therefore review the historical evolution, design advantages, surgical techniques, and clinical outcomes of this valve.

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)0.007
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations15
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in CardiologySame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207