Natural history of secundum atrial septal defect revisited in the era of transcatheter closure.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several reports in the past have described the natural history of atrial septal defects, most dealing with a decrease in size or spontaneous closure of the defect. Some recent articles have also described an increase in size of the defect in a sizable number of cases which may be important in the current era of transcatheter closure. We analyzed the data of 52 consecutive cases diagnosed to have secundum atrial septal defect in the first year of life, seen over the last six years at our center. METHODS AND RESULTS: All infants with a defect size of > or =4 mm on echocardiography were included. The first and the last echocardiographic images with a minimum interval of 6 months were used for analysis. Cases were divided into three groups depending upon the defect diameter (small: 4-5 mm, moderate: 6-8 mm and large: > or =9 mm). The age ranged from one day to 12 months (mean 2.9 +/- 3.2 months). On a follow-up of 0.7 to 7.0 years (mean 2.9 +/- 1.4 years), the septal defect reduced in size in 24 (46%) cases with complete closure in 14 of these. The size remained same in 13 (25%) and enlarged in 15 (29%) cases. The likelihood of closure was highest in small defect group as compared to the large defect group (p < 0.05). Similarly, enlargement was more often seen in large defects. CONCLUSIONS: Small atrial septal defects of 4 mm to 5 mm are very likely to decrease in size or completely close on follow-up. Larger defects, on the other hand may remain large or enlarge further in a significant proportion of cases. A close observation is required for these cases if being considered for transcatheter closure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".