Comparison of the Early Results of Supra-Annular and IntraAnnular Aortic Valve Replacement in Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comparison of the Early Results of Supra-Annular and Intra-Annular Aortic Valve Replacement in Isolated Aortic Valve ReplacementS urgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) is the gold stan- dard for the treatment of aortic stenosis and regurgitation. [1,2]In AVR, the location where the valve is placed is as important as the features of the prosthetic valve.The implanted valve orifice area is important in the regression of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy.The smaller effective orifice area (EOA) resulting from small prosthesis implantation may be associated with higher patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and less regression of LV hypertrophy. [3]Instead of intra-annular valve implantation in patients with small an-Objectives: This study aims to compare the early results of patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) with supra-annular and intra-annular AVR.Methods: Between 2013 and 2019, 113 patients (77 males; mean age 57.816.36years) who underwent isolated AVR were evaluated.The patients were divided into two groups those who underwent supra-annular (n=59) and intra-annular (n=54) AVR.The most commonly used valves in surgeries St Jude Medical Masters (St.Jude Medical, Minneapolis, MN, USA), (n=35, 30.9%),Sorin Mitroflow (Sorin Group Inc., Mitroflow Division, Canada), (n=32, 28.3%, and Carbomedics Top Hat (Sulzer, Carbomedics, Austin, TX), (n=31, 27.4%). Results:The cross-clamp (XCL) and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) times of the patients who underwent supra-annular AVR were found to be significantly higher than the patients who underwent intra-annular AVR.However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of postoperative adverse events.There was no significant difference between the two groups in the postoperative first-week transthoracic echocardiographic (TTE) findings.Conclusion: When comparing supra-annular and intra-annular valve positioning results in patients undergoing isolated AVR, no significant difference was found between the groups in terms of postoperative complications, gradient differences in postoperative TTE, and ejection fractions.Supra-annular valve positioning should be considered, especially in patients with small annulus, in the presence of suitable anatomical features.However, this issue needs to be investigated in future prospective studies with more patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".