Aortic Isthmus Flow Recording Predicts the Outcome of the Recipient Twin after Laser Coagulation in Twin-Twin Transfusion Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The objective was to assess the prognostic value of the systolic flow through the aortic isthmus in monochorionic pregnancies complicated by twin-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS) treated by placental laser ablation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fetal echocardiography and outcome data of 105 cases of TTTS treated by laser photocoagulation of placental anastomoses were reviewed. Hemodynamic parameters were collected before and after treatment. The isthmic systolic index (ISI) was calculated as the peak systolic velocity/systolic nadir ratio. RESULTS: A total of 105 laser coagulations were studied. Fetal echocardiography pre- and post-laser were available in 68 cases, including 55 with data on aortic isthmic Doppler. Survival rates were 17, 22, and 61% for 0, 1, or 2 twins, respectively. At least 1 twin was delivered alive in 83% of the pregnancies. The mean gestational age at surgery was 21 weeks (range 16-26). Median ISI values were similar for donor and recipient twins, before and after laser ablation (all p > 0.05). A lower recipient ISI before laser was related to early recipient demise within 24 h (p = 0.04). DISCUSSION: A lower ISI before placental laser ablation for TTTS is associated with postoperative demise of the recipient twin.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".