MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416547160 · doi:10.1016/j.jaccas.2025.106142

ELASTACLIP and TMVR for Failed TEER With Leaflet Tear

2025· article· en· W4416547160 on OpenAlexaff
Amr Gamal, Yazeed Almalki, Thomas Attumalil, Akshay Bagai, Géraldine Ong, Gianluigi Bisleri, Sami Alnasser, Neil Fam

Bibliographic record

VenueJACC Case Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeaflet (botany)Mitral valveValve replacementMitral valve replacementMitral valve annuloplasty

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Severe mitral regurgitation (MR) after unsuccessful mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) is relatively uncommon. Elderly comorbid patients may have limited options for definitive MR treatment after failed TEER. CASE SUMMARY: A 72-year-old woman with dilated cardiomyopathy presented with symptomatic severe functional MR and underwent M-TEER. During the procedure, the patient developed hemodynamic instability due to posterior leaflet tear with torrential MR which could not be addressed by the TEER. The patient had refractory heart failure despite medical therapy and was not an operative candidate. Following heart team discussion, she underwent ELASTACLIP followed by transcatheter mitral valve replacement using SAPIEN M3. Her condition promptly stabilized, and she was discharged home with stable NYHA II symptoms and trace MR at follow-up. DISCUSSION: Failed M-TEER with significant residual MR carries a high risk of mortality with limited treatment options. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement with ELASTACLIP is a feasible and definitive solution in selected patients after failed M-TEER. TAKE-HOME MESSAGE: ELASTACLIP with transcatheter mitral valve replacement using SAPIEN M3 is a safe and effective option for failed M-TEER.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 venueJACC Case ReportsSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207