MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551795631 · doi:10.1002/ccd.26834

From tricuspid to double orifice Morphology: Percutaneous tricuspid regurgitation repair with the MitraClip device in congenitally corrected‐transposition of great arteries

2016· article· en· W2551795631 on OpenAlexaff
Fabien Picard, Victor‐Xavier Tadros, Anita Asgar

Bibliographic record

VenueCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersFédération Française de Cardiologie
KeywordsMedicineMitraClipGreat arteriesCardiologyInternal medicineRegurgitation (circulation)VentricleMitral regurgitationTricuspid valveTricuspid Valve InsufficiencyHeart failureAtrioventricular valveSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Edge to edge transcatheter mitral valve repair with MitraClip (Abbott Vascular, Menlo Park, CA) is increasing for high-risk surgical patients with significant mitral regurgitation. Patients with congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries (CCTGA) presenting with tricuspid valve regurgitation of a systemic right ventricle may represent particularly challenging candidates for MitraClip given their anatomy. We report the case of a 67-year-old gentleman with CCTGA and severe tricuspid regurgitation who was referred for MitraClip implantation after heart team consensus. Successful implantation of one clip was performed, achieving a significant reduction of the regurgitation. Similarly, favorable findings were confirmed at 6 months, 1 and 2 years follow-up and the patient had no recurrent heart failure admissions after 2-year follow-up. We describe the technical considerations and the importance of 3D-transoesophageal echocardiography for performing the MitraClip of a trileaflet systemic atrioventricular valve. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.287
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations20
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatheterization and Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207