Current status of the Ross procedure in aortic valve surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rossova operace je unikĂĄtnĂm chirurgickĂ˝m konceptem, kterĂ˝ ĹeĹĄĂ nereparabilnĂ postiĹženĂ aortĂĄlnĂ chlopnÄ jejĂ nĂĄhradou vlastnĂ chlopnĂ plicnice. VĂ˝tokovĂ˝ trakt pravĂŠ komory je po vytnutĂ plicnice rekonstruovĂĄn transplantacĂ pulmonĂĄlnĂho alograftu. PlicnicovĂĄ chlopeĹ v aortĂĄlnĂ pozici (pulmonĂĄlnĂ autograft) vysoce pĹedÄĂ jinĂŠ nĂĄhraĹžky svĂ˝mi hemodynamickĂ˝mi vlastnostmi, viabilitou se schopnostĂ rĹŻstu (u dÄtskĂ˝ch pacientĹŻ) a nĂzkĂ˝m rizikem tromboembolismu a infekÄnĂ endokarditidy. PĹes nespornĂŠ vĂ˝hody pulmonĂĄlnĂho autograftu vzbuzuje Rossova operace kontroverze a chirurgickĂ˝ respekt, protoĹže jde o technicky nĂĄroÄnĂ˝ vĂ˝kon, kterĂ˝ navĂc pĹedstavuje pro dalĹĄĂ chlopeĹ riziko komplikacĂ a pĹedpoklĂĄdanĂŠ reoperace. Renesance zĂĄjmu o Rossovu operaci je zpĹŻsobena zejmĂŠna poznĂĄnĂm kritickĂ˝ch krokĹŻ, standardizacĂ operace i znalostĂ dlouhodobĂ˝ch vĂ˝sledkĹŻ. Ve velkĂ˝ch sestavĂĄch nemocnĂ˝ch byly prokĂĄzĂĄny vĂ˝znamnĂŠ vĂ˝hody pro nemocnĂŠ v podobÄ vynikajĂcĂho pĹeĹžĂvĂĄnĂ, nĂzkĂŠ Äetnosti komplikacĂ a vysokĂŠ kvality Ĺživota. Pokud je Rossova operace provĂĄdÄna ve specializovanĂ˝ch centrech s dĹŻrazem na technickĂŠ detaily zajiĹĄĹĽujĂcĂ dlouhodobou stabilitu autograftu i alograftu, je atraktivnĂ alternativou zejmĂŠna pro mladĂŠ nemocnĂŠ s postiĹženĂm aortĂĄlnĂ chlopnÄ.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".