Determinants of late outcomes in women undergoing mitral repair of myxomatous degeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Studies have consistently shown that women have worse perioperative outcomes following mitral surgery compared with men. Few data are available that explain these divergent outcomes. This study was conducted to determine whether women with degenerative mitral valve disease present to surgery with more advanced disease than men, and to determine whether these differences influence long-term clinical outcomes. METHODS: Seven hundred and forty-three patients underwent repair of mitral regurgitation due to myxomatous degeneration between 2001 and 2014. Of these, 208 (28%) were females and concomitant coronary bypass grafting was performed in 103 (14%). The mean clinical follow-up was for 3.1 years, and extended to 11.9 years. RESULTS: , P = 0.028) and higher right ventricular systolic pressure (44.4 ± 14.4 vs 41.7 ± 13.3 mmHg, P = 0.026) compared with men. Five-year survival and freedom from recurrent MR ≥2+ were 88.7 ± 1.8 and 90.7 ± 1.6%, respectively. Although gender was not associated with survival (hazard ratio: 1.04 ± 0.4, P = 0.91), women were more likely to develop recurrent MR ≥2+ at follow-up compared with men (hazard ratio: 1.9 ± 0.5, P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: In this large series, women with degenerative mitral valve disease presented with echocardiographic markers suggestive of more advanced disease at the time of surgery. Although there was no difference in early or late survival between groups, women were more likely to develop recurrent MR ≥2+ over the course of follow-up. Earlier surgical referral of women may, therefore, be advised.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".