MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410544422 · doi:10.1002/ccd.31605

Venous Access Alone Versus Arterial and Venous Access for Patent Arterial Duct Device Closure in Childhood

2025· article· en· W4410544422 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Hassan, Marisa Signorile, Rajiv Chaturvedi, Lee Benson

Bibliographic record

VenueCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Conditions and Treatments
Canadian institutionsTed Rogers Centre for Heart ResearchSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVenous accessCardiologyInternal medicineClosure (psychology)SurgeryCatheter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The persistently patent arterial duct accounts for ~12% of congenital heart lesions. Untreated, it may result in heart failure due to volume loading of the left heart, pulmonary hypertension, and infective endarteritis. Percutaneous device closure is the preferred occlusion technique, with the standard approach consisting of femoral artery access for angiography and venous access for device delivery (AA). A venous-only strategy (VA) for angiography and device delivery can also be employed. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that VA would eliminate the need of arterial entry, reduce procedure times and radiation exposure compared to standard AA. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of isolated arterial duct device closure at the Hospital for Sick Children from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2022. Exclusions included premature neonates, children requiring arterial access for monitoring, and those who underwent other procedures. Children were categorized based upon initial access determined by operator preference into VA or AA groups. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 405 children, 252 (62.2%) females, with a median age of 3.1 years (IQR 1.30-5.84), median weight 13.2 kg (IQR 9.0-19.5), and duct diameter of 2.9 mm (IQR 2.0-3.5) with no significant differences between the groups. Type A ducts were more frequent in the AA group (90% vs. 72%). The VA group included 106 children, of which 14 (13.2%) required AA conversion for angiography due to complex ductal anatomy, to assess device position before release, but remained in the VA group for analysis. Children in the VA group had lower dose area product (DAP) (p < 0.001), fluoroscopy times (p = 0.025), contrast volumes (p < 0.001), procedure times (p < 0.001), and recovery room lengths of stay (LOS) (p < 0.001). Six (5.7%) VA children required admission compared to 44 (14.7%) in the AA group (p = 0.015) with no difference in reintervention rates. Weighted regression analysis showed VA was associated with reduced admission likelihood (OR: 0.354 [0.131, 0.822], p = 0.024), DAP (coef -126.4 [-213.3, -39.4], p = 0.004), and contrast volumes (coef 31.2 [-36.6, -25.9], p < 0.001) compared to AA. CONCLUSIONS: Venous-only access was associated with lower DAP and recovery room LOS. Additionally, VA was associated with a lower likelihood of admission with no difference in reintervention rates, suggesting procedural safety. These findings support the consideration of VA as a preferred approach for appropriate cases.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.850
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatheterization and Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicCardiovascular Conditions and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207