Repair of Anomalous Aortic Origin of a Coronary Artery in 113 Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anomalous aortic origin of a coronary artery (AAOCA) encompasses a wide morphologic spectrum, which has impeded consensus regarding indications for the diverse repair strategies. We constructed a profile of current surgical techniques and explore their application to morphologic variants. METHODS: Patients<30 years old (n=113) with isolated AAOCA who underwent operations at 29 Congenital Heart Surgeons Society (CHSS) institutions from 1998 to 2012 were identified from the CHSS AAOCA Registry. Operative findings were related to surgical techniques at index repairs by cross-tabulation. RESULTS: Anomalous origin of the left main or left anterior descending coronary artery was present in 33 (29%) patients and of the right coronary artery in 78 (69%) patients; 2 arteries originated directly above the commissure between the left and right sinuses. There were 101 (89%) interarterial and intramural (IA/IM) arteries, 10 (9%) were interarterial but not intramural (IA/NIM) and 2 (2%) were neither interarterial nor intramural. Intramural arteries were unroofed in 100 (88%) operations, usually with intimal tacking after incision (n=47) or excision (n=25) of the common wall. Coronary reimplantation (n=11), pulmonary artery relocation (n=7; 5 for IA/NIM), simple ostioplasty (without unroofing; n=3), coronary artery bypass grafting (n=2), and ostial window (n=1) were less common. In 37 (33%) operations, a valvar commissure was taken down; 33 were resuspended. CONCLUSION: Current surgical repair of AAOCA is individualized to morphology, particularly the presence of intramural and/or interarterial segments. This report is foundational for future planned CHSS studies that will examine interventional and noninterventional outcomes and ultimately guide management of AAOCA.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".