MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220682811 · doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezac194

Coaptation length predicts early- and intermediate-term durability following degenerative mitral repair

2022· article· en· W4220682811 on OpenAlexaff
Fadi Hage, Ali Hage, Mohsyn Imran Malik, Nikolaos Tzemos, Michael Chu

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMitral regurgitationMedicineConfidence intervalCardiologyInternal medicineMitral valveSurgeryMitral valve repairCohort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The impact of coaptation length on recurrent mitral regurgitation following degenerative mitral repair is not fully understood. METHODS: Between May 2008 and February 2021, 386 consecutive patients underwent mitral repair for degenerative mitral regurgitation at a single centre. We compared patients with a post-repair coaptation length >11 mm (long-coaptation group, n = 230) and ≤11 mm (short-coaptation group, n = 156). The coaptation length cutoff was selected based on published postoperative transesophageal echocardiographic measurement of mitral repair patients and healthy controls. Propensity score with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses were performed. The median duration of clinical follow-up was 41 months and follow-up was complete in the entire cohort. RESULTS: The long-coaptation patients underwent more neochord implantation (89% vs 65%, P < 0.001) and less leaflet resection (11% vs 29%, P < 0.001). Overall in-hospital/30-day mortality and mitral reintervention occurred in 3 (1%) and 4 (1%) patients, respectively, and freedom from recurrent mitral regurgitation was 98% at 1 year and 94% at 5 years. Freedom from recurrent mitral regurgitation moderate or greater was significantly higher in the long-coaptation patients (IPTW-adjusted difference in average time to recurrent mitral regurgitation: 31 months, 95% confidence interval 9-53, P = 0.006). However, there was no difference in intermediate-term survival between both groups (IPTW-adjusted difference in average time to death: 9.5 months, 95% confidence interval -27 to 46, P = 0.61). Stratified analysis and pairwise comparison of different coaptation intervals also appeared to support the protective effect of longer coaptation on repair durability. CONCLUSIONS: Longer coaptation length appears to be associated with improved intermediate-term durability after mitral repair.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Cardio-Thoracic SurgerySame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207