MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367322254 · doi:10.3389/fcvm.2023.1090572

Comparison of effective regurgitant orifice area by the PISA method and tricuspid coaptation gap measurement to identify very severe tricuspid regurgitation and stratify mortality risk

2023· article· en· W4367322254 on OpenAlexafffund
Yohann Bohbot, L Tordjman, Julien Dreyfus, Thierry Le Tourneau, Yoan Lavie‐Badie, Christine Selton‐Suty, Benjamin Elegamandji, G L'official, Antoine Fraix, Samy Aghezzaf, Pierre Yves Turgeon, David Messika–Zeitoun, Maurice Enriquez‐Sarano, Augustin Coisne, Erwan Donal, Christophe Tribouilloy

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversité Laval
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyRegurgitation (circulation)Clinical endpointTricuspid valveClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Various definitions of very severe (VS) tricuspid regurgitation (TR) have been proposed based on the effective regurgitant orifice area (EROA) or tricuspid coaptation gap (TCG). Because of the inherent limitations associated with the EROA, we hypothesized that the TCG would be more suitable for defining VSTR and predicting outcomes. Materials and methods In this French multicentre retrospective study, we included 606 patients with ≥moderate-to-severe isolated functional TR (without structural valve disease or an overt cardiac cause) according to the recommendations of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Patients were further stratified into VSTR according to the EROA (≥60 mm 2 ) and then according to the TCG (≥10 mm). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality and the secondary endpoint was cardiovascular mortality. Results The relationship between the EROA and TCG was poor ( R 2 = 0.22), especially when the size of the defect was large. Four-year survival was comparable between patients with an EROA <60 mm 2 vs. ≥60 mm 2 (68 ± 3% vs. 64 ± 5%, p = 0.89). A TCG ≥10 mm was associated with lower four-year survival than a TCG <10 mm (53 ± 7% vs. 69 ± 3%, p < 0.001). After adjustment for covariates, including comorbidity, symptoms, dose of diuretics, and right ventricular dilatation and dysfunction, a TCG ≥10 mm remained independently associated with higher all-cause mortality (adjusted HR[95% CI] = 1.47[1.13–2.21], p = 0.019) and cardiovascular mortality (adjusted HR[95% CI] = 2.12[1.33–3.25], p = 0.001), whereas an EROA ≥60 mm 2 was not associated with all-cause or cardiovascular mortality (adjusted HR[95% CI]: 1.16[0.81–1.64], p = 0.416, and adjusted HR[95% CI]: 1.07[0.68–1.68], p = 0.784, respectively) Conclusion The correlation between the TCG and EROA is weak and decreases with increasing defect size. A TCG ≥10 mm is associated with increased all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and should be used to define VSTR in isolated significant functional TR.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cardiovascular MedicineSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207