Lessons Learned From Three Patients Who Underwent Cesarean Section and Cardiac Valvular Surgery Simultaneously: Anesthesiologists’ Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cardiac valvular disease constitutes a challenge during pregnancy. Herein, we present our experience with three patients who underwent caesarean section and cardiac valvular surgery simultaneously. The purpose of this case series was to outline the clinical characteristics and to highlight the surgical/anesthesiologic pitfalls to be considered in patients who will undergo cardiac valvular surgery and caesarean section simultaneously. Methods: This retrospective case series was implemented using data extracted from the medical files of three patients who underwent cardiac valvular surgery and caesarean section in the obstetrics and gynecology and cardiovascular surgery departments of our tertiary care center. Demographic data, history, echocardiographic findings, surgical and anesthesiologic techniques as well as perioperative information and therapeutic outcomes were recorded. Results: Three pregnant women with an average age of 33.67 years were diagnosed with various cardiac valvular pathologies on the 3rd trimester. Owing to their diminished cardiac reserves and clear indications for cesarean section, the patients underwent cardiac valvular surgery subsequent to the cesarean section. Procedures were completed successfully on all patients and mothers and infants were discharged after a maternal follow-up in intensive care unit. Conclusion: We suggest that cardiac valve surgery can be performed simultaneously just after cesarean section in selected cases. Risks and benefits must be analyzed well prior to the decision making for the absolute necessity of the invasive procedure. Close collaboration between disciplines, well equipped referral centers, trained personnel and increased awareness on possible complications are the key points for successful surgical management of pregnant women with cardiac valve disease.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".