Modes of bioprosthetic valve failure: a narrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A thorough understanding of the modes of bioprosthetic valve failure is critical as clinicians will be facing an increasing number of patients presenting with failed bioprostheses in coming years. The purpose of this article is to review modes of bioprosthestic valve degeneration, their management, and identify gaps for future research. RECENT FINDINGS: Guidelines recommend monitoring hemodynamic performance of prosthetic valves using serial echocardiograms to determine valve function and presence of valve degeneration. Modes of bioprosthetic valve failure may be categorized as structural degeneration (calcification, tears, fibrosis, flail), nonstructural degeneration (pannus), thrombosis, and endocarditis. Calcification is the most common form of structural valve degeneration. Predictors of bioprosthetic valve failure include valves implanted in the mitral position, younger age, and type of valve (porcine versus bovine pericardial). Failed bioprosthetic valves are managed with either redo surgical replacement or transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation. SUMMARY: Several modes of bioprosthetic valve failure exist, which vary based on patient, implant position, and valve characteristics. Further research is required to characterize factors associated with early failure to delay structural valve degeneration and improve patient prognosis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".