Aortopulmonary Collaterals After Bidirectional Cavopulmonary Connection or Fontan Completion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aortopulmonary collaterals (APCs) have been associated with increased morbidity after the Fontan operation. We aimed to quantify APC flow after bidirectional cavopulmonary connections and Fontan completions, using phase-contrast MRI, and to identify risk factors for the development of APCs. METHODS AND RESULTS: APC blood flow was quantifiable in 24 of 36 retrospectively analyzed MRI studies. Sixteen studies were performed after the bidirectional cavopulmonary connections (group A) and 8 after the Fontan operation (group B). APC blood flow was calculated by subtracting the blood flow volume through the pulmonary arteries from that through the pulmonary veins. The ratio of pulmonary to systemic blood flow (Qp/Qs) was 0.93+/-0.26 in group A and 1.27+/-0.16 in group B. APC flow was 1.42 (0.58 to 3.83) L/min/m(2) and 0.82 (0.50 to 1.81) L/min/m(2) in groups A and B, respectively. The mean inaccuracies corresponded to 7.9+/-14.5% and 7.1+/-13.6% of ascending aortic flow in groups A and B, respectively. Qp/Qs was negatively correlated with a younger age at the time of the bidirectional cavopulmonary connections operation (r=0.62, P=0.01) and positively correlated with the age at the time of the Fontan completion (r=0.81, P=0.01). Patients with a previous right-sided modified Blalock-Taussig shunt had more collateral flow to the right lung than those without. CONCLUSIONS: APC blood flow can be noninvasively measured in bidirectional cavopulmonary connections and Fontan patients, using MRI in the majority of patients and results in a significant left-to-right shunt.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".