MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3213751753 · doi:10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.9008

Abstract 9008: Echocardiographic Markers in Early Postnatal Life to Predict Intervention in Coarctation of Aorta

2021· article· en· W3213751753 on OpenAlexaff
Punnanee Wutthigate, Jessica Simoneau, Claudia Renaud, Gabriel Altit

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoarctation of the aortaCardiologyInternal medicineAortaIntervention (counseling)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Coarctation of the aorta (CoA) is challenging to diagnose in the early neonatal life due to the patent ductus arteriosus (PDA). We aimed to describe the resource utilization, early post-natal cardiac profile and predictors for need of cardiac surgery. Methods: Retrospective study of infants with an antenatal suspicion of CoA, without major associated cardiac anomalies, born at ≥37 weeks during 2014 to 2020. The analyzed echocardiography (ECHO) was performed within 48 hours after birth. Those not requiring post-natal intervention (normal group) were compared to those that required post-natal cardiac surgery (CoA). Strain was measured using speckle-tracking ECHO (STE). Results: A total of 51 newborns were included, of which 40 (78%) were normal and 11 (22%) underwent intervention. In the normal group, median hospitalization was 4 [2-6] days, 6 (15%) were exposed to prostaglandin E (PGE) infusion, 38 (95%) were on intravenous fluids, 9 (23%) required gavage and age at full feeds was 3 days (IQR: 2-5). Ductus was patent in all newborns and aortic arch measurements were significantly smaller in the CoA (ascending [p=0.01], proximal, distal, isthmus [ p <0.001]). Right ventricular (RV) predominance was higher in the CoA group, as demonstrated by the left ventricular (LV) end-systolic eccentricity index (EI) (1.60 [0.28] vs 2.16 [0.45]; p <0.001) and by a larger end-diastolic area (EDA) of the RV in apical 4 chamber (A4C) relative to the LV-EDA - with a ratio of 1.02 [0.2] vs 1.56 [0.23]; p <0.001. Isthmus and EI were predictive for intervention (OR 26, 95%CI (-42 to -9); p =0.002, OR 4.5, 95%CI (1.5-7.5); p =0.003). A RV to LV EDA ratio in A4C greater than 1.3 demonstrated a high probability for intervention (AUC = 0.97). CoA newborns had a lower RV deformation by STE (peak systolic strain rate (SR); -0.98 [0.17] vs -0.83 [0.2]; p =0.02, early diastolic SR; 1.05 [0.2] vs 0.85 [0.26]; p =0.01). Conclusions: Most infants with antenatal suspicion of CoA did not require intervention but were high consumers of resources. Despite PDA patency, isthmus and RV predominance on first post-natal ECHO were predictors for surgery. The novel markers of strain by STE and ventricular EDA ratio in A4C may help predicting those with true CoA requiring intervention.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCongenital Heart Disease Studies→French-language works237,207→