MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977769686 · doi:10.1111/chd.12842

A case series of left main coronary artery ostial atresia and a review of the literature

2019· review· en· W2977769686 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud Alsalehi, Aamir Jeewa, Andrea Wan, Juan Contreras, Shi‐Joon Yoo, Jessica A. Laks

Bibliographic record

VenueCongenital Heart Disease · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Artery Anomalies
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRevascularizationCardiologyInternal medicineArteryAtresiaStress testing (software)SurgeryRadiologyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Left main coronary artery ostial atresia (LMCAOA) is a rare congenital anomaly of the coronary arteries. The published literature regarding the current diagnostic and management recommendations are limited. We present three case series of LMCAOA from our institution, including one with a unique association with anomalous origin of left coronary artery (LCA) from pulmonary artery. In addition, this report includes a review of 50 pediatric and 43 adult cases from literature. The majority of the patients were symptomatic. Sudden cardiac death occurred in 10% of pediatric patients and 7% of adult patients. Almost half of pediatric patients had additional cardiac lesions. At the time of diagnosis, 82% of patients had abnormal exercise stress test and 73% had abnormal myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). The diagnosis of LMCAOA was suspected by echocardiography in 47% of pediatric patients, while 26% were initially misdiagnosed as anomalous origin of LCA from pulmonary artery. Coronary angiography confirmed the diagnosis in most cases and 70.5% of pediatric patients had small collaterals, while 80.5% of adult patients had large collaterals. Nine pediatric patients had no revascularization surgery with five deaths. Revascularization surgery was performed in 39 pediatric patients with four deaths. After 2005, there is a gradual shift toward performing coronary osteoplasty rather than coronary artery bypass grafting. Eighteen adult patients had revascularization surgery and all survived. Fifteen adult patients had no revascularization surgery, of which there were five deaths. In patients with LMCAOA, revascularization surgery is currently recommended in the presence of symptoms, ischemic changes on electrocardiogram or exercise stress test, myocardial perfusion defect on MPI, global left ventricular systolic dysfunction on echocardiogram, severe mitral regurgitation, or small-sized collaterals in coronary angiography. Short-term and mid-term outcomes are encouraging.

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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations37
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCongenital Heart DiseaseSame topicCoronary Artery AnomaliesFrench-language works237,207