MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 9363: Intervention for Re-coarctation in the Single Ventricle Reconstruction Trial: Incidence, Risk and Outcomes

2012· article· en· W6903379236 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiac catheterizationVentricleShunt (medical)CohortNorwood procedurePulmonary arterySingle Center

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: To determine the incidence of re-coarctation (re-CoA), risk factors and outcomes in patients with single right ventricle lesions after Norwood. Methods: The cohort included subjects randomized to right ventricle-pulmonary artery shunt (RVPAS) or modified Blalock Taussig shunt (MBTS) in the Single Ventricle Reconstruction (SVR) Trial. Re-CoA was defined by intervention, either catheter-based or surgical. Univariate analysis and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were performed adjusting for center. Results: Of the 549 SVR subjects, 97 (18%) underwent 137 interventions (92 balloon aortoplasty; 45 surgical) for re-CoA. Intervention typically occurred at pre-stage II catheterization (n=71, 52%) or at stage II surgery (n=44, 32%). Median age and catheterization gradient at first intervention were 4.9 months (range: 1.1-10.5) and 17 mm Hg (range: 0-60) respectively. Center intervention rates varied from 0-50%. In multivariable analysis, re-CoA was not associated with assigned shunt type, but was associated with actual shunt type received (HR 2.0 for RVPAS vs. MBTS, p=0.02), and Norwood discharge peak echo-Doppler arch gradient (HR 1.07 per 1 mm Hg, p<0.01). No other demographic, anatomic or surgical variables predicted intervention. Subjects with re-CoA demonstrated comorbidities at pre-stage II evaluation including higher pulmonary arterial pressures (15.4 ± 3.0 vs. 14.5 ± 3.5 mm Hg; p=0.05), higher pulmonary vascular resistance (2.6 ± 1.6 vs. 2.0 ± 1.0 WU x m²; p=0.04) and increased echocardiographic volumes (end-diastolic volume: 28.0 ± 7.4 vs. 24.9 ± 8.2 ml; p=0.01). There was no difference in 12-month post-randomization transplant-free survival for those with and without re-CoA (83% vs. 86%; p=0.5). Conclusions: Intervention for re-CoA was common and varied by center. The association with receipt of an RVPAS may be due to intra-operative cross-over because of arch anatomy that prohibited use of a MBTS. Those undergoing intervention demonstrated ventricular dilation and worsened hemodynamics prior to stage II surgery. Although intervention was not associated with increased 1-year transplant/mortality, further evaluation is warranted to evaluate effects of morbidity of re-CoA.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCongenital Heart Disease Studies→French-language works237,207→