Midterm, multicenter clinical and hemodynamic results for the Trifecta aortic pericardial valve
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the midterm hemodynamic performance and clinical outcomes of the Trifecta aortic pericardial valve. Methods In a multicenter, prospective, nonrandomized, follow-up study, 710 patients underwent surgical implantation of a pericardial stented aortic prosthesis (Trifecta valve; St Jude Medical, St. Paul, Minn). The valve is constructed from bovine pericardium mounted externally onto a titanium stent. Subjects were followed on an annual basis over 6 years. Results Operations were performed from 2007 to 2009, and mean age was 72.4 ± 9.3 years; 471 of 710 (66.3%) were men. Preoperatively, 361 of 710 (50.8%) of patients were in New York Heart Association class III or IV, and at 6 years postoperatively, 92 of 96 (95.8%) were New York Heart Association class I or II. Six years postoperatively, average mean gradient across all valve sizes was 11.0 mm Hg, and the average effective orifice area index was 0.80 cm 2 /m 2 . The proportion of patients without moderate-to-severe valvular regurgitation at 6 years was 95.2% (80/84). Six years postoperatively, freedom from valve-related mortality, nonstructural dysfunction, and paravalvular leak were 98.3%, 98.6%, and 98.9%, respectively, and freedom from reoperation due to structural valve deterioration was 97.3% (95% confidence limits, 98.6-94.7). Conclusion These midterm results demonstrate that the Trifecta valve is a safe and effective valve substitute with excellent hemodynamic performance and durability that is maintained through the 6-year follow-up period.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".