Stentless freestyle aortic valve/root bioprostheses: a northern Ontario community hospital perspective.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the controversial issues of postoperative aortic insufficiency (AI), operative mortality and length of hospital stay (LOS) following stentless Freestyle aortic valve replacement (AVR). SETTING: All surgeries were performed in a small northern community hospital (Sudbury Regional Hospital, Sudbury, Ontario). DESIGN: Retrospective study of all stentless AVRs and all stented AVRs from May 1996 to December 1998, and isolated coronary artey bypasses (CABGs) done in 1996/97. PATIENTS: Patients were not selected. All consecutive patients requiring bioprosthetic AVR during this period, regardless of risk, complexity or urgency, were included. In total, 112 stentless AVRs, 138 stented AVRs and 432 isolated CABGs were examined. MAIN RESULTS: AI was rare following stentless AVRs: no significant valvular AI and only 0.9% significant paravalvular AI occurred. The incidence of AI was significantly greater with continuous than with interrupted proximal suturing (P=0. 016). No valve thromboses, thromboemboli or structural failure occurred during 3.8 years of follow-up of the stentless AVRs. The LOS for stentless AVRs was no longer than for stented AVRs or for isolated CABGs. No significant difference was found in the operative mortality following stentless and stented AVRs. The early mortality rate of 1.8% for stentless AVRs was not affected by preoperative risk strata, complexity or urgency. CONCLUSIONS: Early morbidity with stentless AVRs was comparable and LOS was no longer than with stented AVRs. The use of Freestyle bioprosthesis in itself did not result in greater operative mortality, regardless of risk, complexity or urgency of the procedure. Consistent reproducible techniques and experience improve postoperative outcome. It is essential that potential users carefully learn safe and effective surgical techniques to avoid adverse outcomes during the learning curve.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".