The first transapical transcatheter aortic valve‐in‐valve implantation using the <scp>J</scp>‐valve system into a failed biophysio aortic prosthesis in a patient with high risk of coronary obstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We report the first successful valve‐in‐valve (ViV) implantation into a failed Edwards Biophysio surgical prosthesis (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) and also the first use of the J‐Valve system (Jie Cheng Medical Technologies, Suzhou, China) in a ViV configuration. A 77‐year old male had symptomatic severe aortic stenosis secondary to failure of a 25 mm Biophysio bioprosthetic valve implanted 11 years previously, along with concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) revealed calcified leaflets, a mean aortic gradient of 50 mm Hg, and an estimated valve area of 0.9 cm2 with no aortic insufficiency. The patient had low coronary ostial height with the right coronary artery arising only 8.5 mm from the valve annulus and the left main coronary artery arising only 9.4 mm from the valve annulus. Risk of coronary ostial obstruction was especially concerning in context of both the patient's extremely low coronary ostial height and the unique structure of the Biophysio valve. Under general anesthesia, transapical transcatheter aortic ViV implantation with a 25 mm J‐Valve was performed in a hybrid operating room. The J‐Valve prosthesis was deployed in the 25 mm Biophysio surgical valve without difficulty or complications. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications. The patient was discharged home after 3 days. TTE at 1 year showed a mean aortic valve gradient of 14 mm Hg, and no aortic insufficiency. This case demonstrated that J‐Valve implantation may be a new option for patients at high risk for coronary obstruction.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".