MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997064854 · doi:10.4022/jafib.2256

Systematic Review of Contiguous Vessel and Valve Injury Associated with Endocardial Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Devices

2019· article· en· W2997064854 on OpenAlexaff
Sharma Sharan Prakash, Madoukh Bader, Atkins Donita, Nydegger Cherie, Jeffery Courtney, B Sudha, Gopinathannair Rakesh, Saw Jacqueline, Andrea Natale, Lakkireddy Dhanunjaya

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Atrial Fibrillation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLeft atrial appendage occlusionCardiologyAtrial fibrillationPulmonary arteryInternal medicineCardiac tamponadePulmonary veinTamponadeArterySurgeryRadiologyWarfarin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endocardial LAAO has been increasingly utilized in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients who are not suitable for long term oral anticoagulation. While overall procedural complications have decreased, rare complications like contiguous vessel and valve injury may be more frequently seen in the future with increase in the procedure volume. We performed a systematic search using predefined terms which reviewed all cases published in literature of contiguous vessel (pulmonary artery, pulmonary vein and left circumflex artery) and mitral valve injury caused by LAAO devices. Our results showed that Amplatzer Cardiac Plug (ACP) and Amplatzer Amulet devices were the most commonly used devices. Pulmonary artery perforation was the most commonly seen collateral vessel injury associated with LAAO. Close proximity of left atrial appendage to pulmonary artery was noted in all cases of pulmonary artery injury. Pulmonary artery injury commonly manifests as pericardial tamponade with hemodynamic collapse and is often fatal. Most common denominator of all the reviewed cases was the presence of an oversized LAAO device. In conclusion, collateral vessels and valve injury can be seen after LAAO mostly with double lobe devices such as ACP or Amulet. Increased awareness by the operators along with proper imaging and investigations could potentially mitigate such rare complications associated with LAAO.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0120.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Atrial FibrillationSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207