Riata lead failure in pediatric and congenital heart disease patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) lead failures occur at higher rates in pediatric and congenital heart disease (CHD) patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate and timing of Riata lead failure in pediatric and CHD patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective, multicenter cohort study of pediatric patients and adults with CHD with implantation of a Riata or Riata ST lead between 2002 and 2009. The prevalence and timing of electrical failure and conductor coil externalization (CCE) were determined. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients and 63 leads from seven centers were included. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) age at implant was 14.4 (11.5-18.7) years and median follow-up was 8.7 (7.3-11.1) years. The underlying diagnosis was a primary arrhythmia disorder in 45%, cardiomyopathy in 31%, and CHD in 28% of patients. Electrical failure occurred in 43% and CCE in 16% of leads at median lead ages of 4.7 (3.4-7.5) and 4.3 (3.9-7.0) years, respectively. Median lead survival free from electrical failure or CCE was 7.9 (95% confidence interval, 5.8-10.0) years. Forty-one percent of leads were functional at the end of the follow-up period, and 33% were extracted with a complication rate of 5%. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of Riata lead electrical failure was high in children and patients with CHD, while the rate of CCE was comparable with published data. Counseling on lead management should factor in the high rate of electrical failure with considerations for elective replacement.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".