MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297965577 · doi:10.1093/icvts/ivac242

Augmenting mitral valve repair evaluation with intraoperative left ventricle pressure measurements

2022· article· en· W4297965577 on OpenAlexaff
Hugo Issa, Mimi Deng, Kenza Rahmouni, Vincent Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVentricleMitral valveMitral valve repairCardiopulmonary bypassSalineCardiologyMitral regurgitationInternal medicinePercutaneousMitral valve annuloplastySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surgical mitral valve repair remains the gold standard treatment of mitral regurgitation due to degenerative disease. Surgery is performed on the quiescent heart; therefore, assessments of valve repair success can only be made following separation from cardiopulmonary bypass. Intra-ventricular pressure measurements are often made in percutaneous valve procedures but has yet been described at the time of surgical repair. As an example, the saline test, whereby normal saline is injected across the mitral valve from the left atrium into the left ventricle, on the arrested heart remains an integral component of surgical repair. However, the haemodynamics of the saline test have never been evaluated. We present a simple and novel technique to quantify the saline test by passing a 22-G catheter across the mitral leaflets during saline testing under maximal ventricle distension. The saline test may be less informative among patients in whom the maximum generated left ventricle diastolic pressure is low. These data may be of help to a surgeon interpreting intraoperative saline tests with the hope of a competent mitral valve. As well, it may provide support for intraventricular pressure monitoring at the time of mitral valve surgery.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Cardiovascular and Thoracic SurgerySame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207