Prediction for residual regurgitation after MitraClip for functional mitral regurgitation using leaflet coaptation index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Given the recent growth in the number of MitraClip procedures in patients with functional mitral regurgitation (MR), there is interest in an echocardiographic index to predict technical success before intervention. We investigated the utility of a novel leaflet coaptation index (LCI) to predict outcomes after MitraClip in functional MR patients. METHODS: Forty consecutive patients with functional MR who underwent MitraClip were included. The LCI was defined as the coapted leaflet length divided by the anteroposterior diameter of the mitral annulus. The coapted leaflet length was calculated by separately tracing the total length of the mitral valve leaflets at early and end systole on transesophageal echocardiography. The primary endpoint was defined as residual MR ≥ moderate after MitraClip. RESULTS: The LCI was significantly associated with residual MR ≥ moderate (odds ratio, 0.827; 95% confidence interval, 0.696-0.982; p = .030) with the cut-off LCI value of 0.14 (sensitivity 70.4%, specificity 69.2%, c-statistic 0.815; p = .001). CONCLUSION: This novel index may be a useful adjunct that can be incorporated into the armamentarium of contemporary clinical performance risk prediction tools for MitraClip success.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".