MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 13582: Fetal Cardiac Intervention for Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome With Intact or Restrictive Atrial Septum: A Report From the International Fetal Cardiac Intervention Registry

2015· article· en· W2951945564 on OpenAlexaff
David W. Jantzen, Anita J. Moon‐Grady, Aimee K. Armstrong, Christoph Berg, Joanna Szymkiewicz–Dangel, Carlen G. Fifer, Michele A. Frommelt, U. Gembruch, Ulrike Herberg, Edgar Jaeggi, Eftichia V. Kontopoulos, Owen Miller, Shaine A. Morris, Renate Oberhoffer, Carlos Augusto Cardoso Pedra, Simone Fontes Pedra, Rubén A. Quintero, Sarah Gelehrter

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypoplastic left heart syndromeFetusIntervention (counseling)Atrial septumCardiologyInternal medicineFetal heartFetal echocardiographyHeart diseasePregnancyPrenatal diagnosisNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Fetal cardiac intervention (FCI) for fetuses with hypoplastic left heart syndrome with restrictive or intact atrial septum (HLHS/IAS) has been reported in single-institution series as a modality that may improve outcomes in a high-risk subset of HLHS patients who historically have very high neonatal mortality. Methods: The International Fetal Cardiac Intervention Registry was established in 2010. For this descriptive analysis, the database was queried for fetuses with HLHS/IAS. Maternal-fetal dyads from 2001 through March 2015 were included. Results: Data from 15 institutions were submitted by data harvest. Of 87 cases of HLHS/IAS entered, 46 cases from 8 sites underwent FCI: 27 with atrial septal perforation/ balloon dilation and 19 with atrial septal stent placement. There were 34 procedural successes with a similar success rate between stents and balloons dilations (12/19=63% stent, 22/27=81% balloon dilation, p=0.19). Fetal complications were common (64% of cases), most frequently a pericardial effusion requiring treatment (51%), but no maternal complications. Procedure-related fetal demise occurred in 6 (13%). Seventeen had a clinical success (atrial septum not requiring urgent intervention at delivery), which was more likely in fetuses with a successful stent (75% stent vs 36% balloon dilation, p=0.03). Delivery by scheduled Cesarean section to facilitate immediate post-natal intervention was less common in those who underwent successful FCI compared with those with unsuccessful FCI or no FCI (3/34=8% FCI vs 18/46=39%, p=0.002). There was a trend toward improved survival to discharge for liveborn infants with HLHS/IAS in those who underwent successful FCI compared with those with unsuccessful FCI or no FCI (16/34=47% FCI vs 13/46=28%, p=0.10). Survival to hospital discharge was greater in those with clinical success compared to a procedural success but no clinical success (71% vs 24%, p=0.01). Conclusion: The early multicenter experience of FCI for HLHS/IAS has good procedural success, with atrial septal stent placement more likely to result in clinical success at delivery. There was a trend toward better survival if FCI was successful, and significantly improved survival if FCI resulted in clinical success at delivery.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCongenital Heart Disease Studies→French-language works237,207→