Modeling of the Tricuspid Valve and Right Ventricle in Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome With a Fontan Circulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In hypoplastic left heart syndrome, tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is associated with circulatory failure and death. We hypothesized that the tricuspid valve (TV) structure of patients with hypoplastic left heart syndrome with a Fontan circulation and moderate or greater TR differs from those with mild or less TR, and that right ventricle volume is associated with TV structure and dysfunction. Methods: TV of 100 patients with hypoplastic left heart syndrome and a Fontan circulation were modeled using transthoracic 3-dimensional echocardiograms and custom software in SlicerHeart. Associations of TV structure to TR grade and right ventricle function and volume were investigated. Shape parameterization and analysis was used to calculate the mean shape of the TV leaflets, their principal modes of variation, and to characterize associations of TV leaflet shape to TR. Results: In univariate modeling, patients with moderate or greater TR had larger TV annular diameters and area, greater annular distance between the anteroseptal commissure and anteroposterior commissure, greater leaflet billow volume, and more laterally directed anterior papillary muscle angles compared to valves with mild or less TR (all P <0.001). In multivariate modeling greater total billow volume, lower anterior papillary muscle angle, and greater distance between the anteroposterior commissure and anteroseptal commissure were associated with moderate or greater TR ( P <0.001, C statistic=0.85). Larger right ventricle volumes were associated with moderate or greater TR ( P <0.001). TV shape analysis revealed structural features associated with TR, but also highly heterogeneous TV leaflet structure. Conclusions: Moderate or greater TR in patients with hypoplastic left heart syndrome with a Fontan circulation is associated with greater leaflet billow volume, a more laterally directed anterior papillary muscle angle, and greater annular distance between the anteroseptal commissure and anteroposterior commissure. However, there is significant heterogeneity of structure in the TV leaflets in regurgitant valves. Given this variability, an image-informed patient-specific approach to surgical planning may be needed to achieve optimal outcomes in this vulnerable and challenging population.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".