MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790392625 · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000002904

Anesthesia for Percutaneous Pulmonary Valve Implantation: A Case Series

2018· article· en· W2790392625 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rafael Salazar, Jane Heggie, Piotr Wolski, Eric Horlick, Mark Osten, Massimiliano Meineri

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeVentricular outflow tractSurgeryAnesthesiaPercutaneousIntubation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Twenty percent of patients born with congenital heart disease present with right ventricular outflow tract abnormalities. These patients require multiple surgical procedures in their lifetime. Transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement (TPVR) has become a viable alternative to conventional pulmonary valve and right ventricular outflow tract surgery in pediatric and adult populations. In this retrospective review, we analyze the perioperative management of adult patients who underwent TPVR in our center. METHODS: The study consisted of a chart review of patients who underwent TPVR at Toronto General Hospital between 2006 and 2015. Information about preoperative assessment, intraoperative anesthetic management, and intra- and postprocedural complications was collected. Two types of percutaneous valves have been used for a conduit or valve size between 16 and 28 mm. These procedures are done via the femoral, jugular, or subclavian vein under general anesthesia. RESULTS: Seventy-nine adults (17-68 years of age) who underwent elective TPVR procedures were included. General anesthesia was used in all cases. Defibrillation was necessary in 1 case, and bradycardia was spontaneously resolved in another 1. Eighty-five percent were successfully extubated at the end of the procedure. Five patients required intraoperative inotropic support. Three patients presented self-resolved hemoptysis. Mechanical ventilation for >24 hours was necessary in 3 cases, 2 of which also required concomitant inotropic support. Four failed deployments and 1 case of persistent conduit stenosis were reported. Three patients required reintubation. All patients were discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing TPVR represent a complex and heterogeneous population. General anesthesia with endotracheal intubation is preferred. Setup for urgent lung isolation and cardiac defibrillation should be considered. Postoperative monitoring and intensive care setting are required. Anesthesiologists with cardiac anesthesia training are probably better suited to manage these patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207