MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408867783 · doi:10.3390/jcm14072257

Concomitant Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair and Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

2025· article· en· W4408867783 on OpenAlexaff
Graeme Prosperi-Porta, Adam Dryden, Donna Nicholson, Mark Hynes, Vincent Chan, Richard G. Jung, Pietro Di Santo, Trevor Simard, Marino Labinaz, Benjamin Hibbert, Omar Abdel‐Razek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConcomitantAppendageLeft atrial appendage occlusionCardiologyInternal medicineEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionOcclusionAnatomyAtrial fibrillationArtificial intelligenceWarfarin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objectives: Atrial fibrillation is a frequent comorbidity amongst patients undergoing mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) for mitral regurgitation. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) can be performed to reduce the risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Both procedures require large-bore venous access, transseptal puncture, and real-time imaging of the left atrium. However, limited data exist evaluating the safety and feasibility of concomitant M-TEER and LAAO. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all concomitant M-TEER and LAAO procedures at our institution between May 2019 and September 2024 to evaluate the safety and feasibility of this approach. Results: Concomitant left atrial appendage occlusion was successful in all 15 patients, requiring an additional 15 min (IQR 11–29) of procedural time. No patients died or had a major vascular complication. Routine transesophageal echocardiography performed within 90 days showed no device related thrombus, and no significant peri-device leak in any patients. Conclusions: Concomitant M-TEER and LAAO are feasible but additional prospective studies or randomized trials are needed to evaluate the potential clinical benefit.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→