MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114104452 · doi:10.1097/hco.0000000000000830

Combined transcatheter mitral and tricuspid edge-to-edge repair: expanding the horizons of interventional heart failure

2020· review· en· W3114104452 on OpenAlexaff
Géraldine Ong, Neil Fam

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Cardiology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMitral regurgitationRegurgitation (circulation)valvular heart diseaseMitral valve repairCardiologyTricuspid valveInternal medicineHeart failureMitral valveSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The combination of mitral regurgitation and tricuspid regurgitation is common in patients with multiple valvular disease and patient management can be challenging. Surgical combined mitral and tricuspid valve surgery is a treatment option for patients meeting criteria but has demonstrated inconsistent long-term benefits. RECENT FINDINGS: Transcatheter mitral and tricuspid edge-to-edge repair has demonstrated early promising results in patients with a prohibitive surgical risk, making it an interesting treatment option. The present review will discuss the physiopathology of this complex disease and contemporary data regarding treatment options for the treatment of combined mitral and tricuspid regurgitation. SUMMARY: Combined transcatheter mitral and tricuspid edge-to-edge repair is a novel treatment option for patients with multiple valvular disease. Further studies are needed to determine optimal patient selection and timing of intervention and demonstrate survival benefit and improvement in clinical outcomes. Advances in technology, with dedicated devices and enhanced imaging techniques may also improve patient outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.010
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in CardiologySame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207