Analysis of post-operative systemic to pulmonary artery shunt failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Systemic to pulmonary artery shunts are utilized in the palliation of children with congenital heart disease and limited or ductal dependent pulmonary blood flow.Methods: This case-control series matched all children at our institution between 2009 and 2015 who had an acute systemic-to-pulmonary artery shunt complication to subjects without acute shunt complication.Subjects were matched according to weight (within 10%), shunt type and size, and use of cardiopulmonary bypass.Nine variables, identified a priori, were compared to determine factors associated with acute shunt failure.Results: Seventeen subjects with shunt failure were identified during the study period.Two infants were excluded because their shunts failed in the operating room prior to sternal closure.There were 10 right modified Blalock-Taussig shunts and five central shunts in each cohort.Shunt size was either 3.5 or 4.0 mm.Median (1 st quartile-3 rd quartile) age at time of surgery was 15 days (10-45) in the shunt complication cohort.Pulmonary artery size was the only factor that was statistically significant between the cohort with the acute shunt complication and the cohort without [median (1 st quartile-3 rd quartile) 3.70 mm (3.25-4.4) vs. 4.50 mm (4.00-5.10);p=0.014]. Conclusion:The impact of acute shunt complication on morbidity and mortality remains substantial.In this study, smaller pulmonary artery size was associated with increased risk of acute shunt failure.Further studies with sufficient power are required to determine additional modifiable risk factors.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".