Implantation of atrial flow regulator devices in patients with congenital heart disease and children with severe pulmonary hypertension or cardiomyopathy—an international multicenter case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The Occlutech Atrial Flow Regulator (AFR) is a self-expandable double-disc nitinol device with a central fenestration. Its use has been approved in the adult population with heart failure and described for pulmonary hypertension (PH). Only case reports and small series have been published about its use in the paediatric population and for congenital heart disease (CHD). Objectives: The authors sought to investigate the feasibility, safety, and short-term follow-up of AFR implantation in patients with CHD or children with PH or cardiomyopathy. Methods: This is a multicenter retrospective study involving 10 centers worldwide. Patients of any age with CHD or patients aged < 18 years with PH or cardiomyopathy needing AFR implantation were included. Results: A total of 40 patients underwent AFR implantation. The median age of the population at the time of the procedure was 58.5 months (IQR: 31.5-142.5) and the median weight was 17 kg (IQR: 10-46). A total of 26 (65.0%) patients had CHD, nine (22.5%) children, a cardiomyopathy, and five (12.5%), a structurally normal heart. The implantation success rate was 100%. There were two early and one late device thrombosis. Two patients (5.0%) with dilated cardiomyopathy on extracorporeal membrane oxygenator (ECMO) died during the hospital stay. At a median follow-up of 330 days (IQR: 125-593), 37 (92.5%) patients were alive. At follow-up, 20 patients improved their New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, 12 patients did not change their NYHA class, and one patient with idiopathic PH worsened. Conclusions: AFR implantation in patients with CHD and children with severe PH or cardiomyopathy is promising and seems to have beneficial effects at short-term follow-up.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".