Safety and feasibility of transradial aortic valve valvuloplasty (TRAV study)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The importance of balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) in the transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) era emerged in the past decades, but the access site related complication rate remained significant. AIM: To establish the safety and technical success of transradial balloon aortic valvuloplasty (trBAV). The secondary objective was to determine the effectiveness and appropriate role of trBAV. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 2017 and 2019, 36 consecutive patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis (AoS) were treated with trBAV in this prospective, single-center study. During the procedure, the efficacy and the aortic valve insufficiency were controlled by hemodynamic measurements and later by echocardiography. The primary end-points were technical success and major adverse events (MAE). Secondary end-points were the access site complication rate, hemodynamic and clinical result of the intervention, procedure-related factors, crossover rate to the femoral access site and hospitalization duration. RESULTS: = 1). CONCLUSIONS: According to our study, radial artery access is a safe and effective option for balloon aortic valvuloplasty in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it