MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2410434900

Performance of bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses in age group 61-70 years.

2005· article· en· W2410434900 on OpenAlexaff
Kriengchai Prasongsukarn, Jamieson Wr, Lichtenstein Sv

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConcomitantMitral valve replacementCardiologyInternal medicineAortic valve replacementEjection fractionCoronary artery diseasePopulationCOPDDiabetes mellitusProsthesisArteryMitral valveHeart failureSurgeryStenosis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The performance of bioprostheses (BP) and mechanical prostheses (MP) from valve-related composites of complications and combined major thromboembolism and hemorrhage were considered in order to facilitate decision-making for the patient age group of 61-70 years. METHODS: The aortic valve replacement (AVR) population (BP, n = 619; MP, n = 303) was differentiated by age, concomitant coronary artery bypass, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and preoperative renal failure. The mitral valve replacement (MVR) population (BP, n = 353; MP, n = 312) was differentiated by valve type, age, concomitant coronary artery bypass, ejection fraction, NYHA and preoperative renal failure. RESULTS: Actual freedom from reoperation for AVR was 92.1 +/- 1.5% for BP and 98.7 +/- 6.6% for MP, and for MVR was 74.5 +/- 2.6% for BP and 93.8 +/- 2.2% (12 years) for MP. Actual freedom from major thromboembolism and hemorrhage for AVR was 85.1 +/- 1.7% for BP and 76.9 +/- 3.6% for MP, and for MVR was 82.7 +/- 2.4% for BP and 76.7 +/- 3.8% (12 years) for MP. Linearized rates were undifferentiated for major thromboembolism. The hemorrhage rate for AVR-BP was 0.55%/pt-yr and for AVR-MP was 2.3%/pt-yr (p < 0.0001); for MVR-BP, the rate was 0.69%/pt-yr and for MVR-MP was 1.85%/pt-yr (p = 0.0011). The only predictor of AVR reoperation was age, and predictors for MVR reoperation were prosthesis type and follow up NYHA class. Predictors of AVR major thromboembolism and hemorrhage were prosthesis type, age, diabetes mellitus and COPD. There were no predictors of MVR major thromboembolism and hemorrhage. CONCLUSION: For the age group of 61-70 years, MP are recommended for MVR to protect from BP reoperation, whilst for AVR BP are recommended to protect from anticoagulant hemorrhage. Freedom from reoperation for AVR was undifferentiated for BP and MP at 12-15 years.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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