An Early Canadian Experience with the Correx Automated Coring and Apical Connector Device for Aortic Valve Bypass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Aortic valve replacement is the standard of care for severe, symptomatic aortic valve stenosis (AS); however, anatomy or pre-existing comorbidities may preclude conventional or alternative transcatheter approaches. Aortic valve bypass (AVB) may be performed as a salvage procedure for the relief of symptomatic aortic stenosis in patients who are not suitable candidates for aortic valve replacement. METHODS: At our institution, seven patients underwent AVB using the Correx automated coring and apical connector system. All patients had severe AS with New York Heart Association functional class 3 symptoms and were not candidates for conventional or transcatheter approaches. Via a left anterolateral thoracotomy to access the descending aorta and left ventricular apex, we used the Correx system (Correx, Waltham, MA USA) to anastomose a valve conduit to the left ventricular apex proximally and the descending aorta distally. Three patients required cardiopulmonary bypass. RESULTS: In all seven patients, the automated coring and apical connector was successfully deployed. There were two in-hospital deaths in this series. Immediately postoperatively and at 3 months, there was a significant reduction in mean and peak valve gradients, and all surviving patients performed at New York Heart Association functional class 1. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic valve bypass seems to be an acceptable alternative for the treatment of severe AS in high-risk patients who are not candidates for aortic valve replacement. The Correx automated system may improve the clinical applicability and surgical reproducibility of AVB in appropriately selected patients in which conventional or transcatheter aortic valve replacement is not a feasible options.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".