MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134703758 · doi:10.1016/j.ahjo.2021.100004

Impact of sex on long-term outcomes following mitral valve repair

2021· article· en· W3134703758 on OpenAlexaff
Ryaan EL‐Andari, Sabin J. Bozso, Jimmy J.H. Kang, Dana Boe, Nicholas M. Fialka, Yongzhe Hong, Michael C. Moon, Darren H. Freed, Jayan Nagendran

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Heart Journal Plus Cardiology Research and Practice · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEjection fractionMedicinePropensity score matchingSingle CenterCardiologyStroke (engine)Mitral valve repairMyocardial infarctionRevascularizationInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studySurgeryMitral valveHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have identified inferior outcomes for women undergoing mitral valve (MV) surgery compared to men, although the cause of this discrepancy has not been identified. We look to isolate surgical approach to identify any impact that sex has on outcomes in order to better inform clinical decision making. In this propensity matched, retrospective, single-center study, outcomes were compared between males and females undergoing a MV repair between 2004 and 2018. The primary outcome was defined as mortality at any point in the follow-up period. Secondary outcomes included stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), repeat revascularization, complications arising from the initial procedure, and postoperative cardiac remodeling. A total of 188 males and 188 females were included after propensity matching. At a median follow up time of 7.6 years, there were 25 deaths in the male group (26.8%) and 23 in the female group (28.2%) (p = 0.771). There were no significant differences in MI, stroke, post-operative pacemaker insertion, or rehospitalization following MV repair. Left ventricular (LV) size for males was reduced from an initial 55.6 ± 7.3 mm to 49.9 ± 7.4 mm (p < 0.001), and for females from an initial 51.5 ± 7 mm to 46.9 ± 7.1 mm (p < 0.001). LV ejection fraction (LVEF) was reduced with a preoperative LVEF for males of 57.7% ± 8.9% and 53.7% ± 9.6% postoperatively (p = 0.002), and LVEF for females of 57.8% ± 9.1% preoperatively and 54.8% ± 9.2% postoperatively (p < 0.001). Left atrial (LA) volume was reduced from an initial 51 ± 22 ml/m2 to 43.7 ± 25.2 ml/m2 (p < 0.001), and 50.9 ± 19.2 ml/m2 to 44.2 ± 19.8 ml/m2 (p < 0.001), for males and females respectively. LA diameter was reduced for males from an initial 49.7 ± 9.7 mm to 47.3 ± 9.4 mm (p = 0.043), and from 48 ± 8.7 mm to 44.3 ± 9.1 mm for females postoperatively (p = 0.017). Current literature demonstrates inferior outcomes for females when compared to males undergoing MV surgery with patients undergoing a variety of surgical approaches. The results of this study suggest that surgical intervention for a subset of patients, those undergoing repair of the MV, is safe and offers similar outcomes for males and females.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.006
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.521
Teacher spread0.425 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Heart Journal Plus Cardiology Research and PracticeSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207