MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6958104153 · doi:10.60692/fzf74-nxa24

Rare aneurysm of anterior mitral valve leaflet-a case report

2019· article· en· W6958104153 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Boniface Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMitral valveMitral valve replacementAneurysmPresentation (obstetrics)Mitral valve repairSystoleMitral valve annuloplasty

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Mitral valve aneurysm (MVA) is a saccular outpouching of the mitral leaflet which expands on systole and collapses during diastole. The case of MVA was first described in 1729 by Morand. It is one of the rare entities with a reported incidence of only 0.2–0.29% and no such case reported in Pakistan before. Case presentation A 51 year old female presented with dyspnea and chest pain for 3 months. Upon investigating, trans-esophageal echocardiography (TEE) revealed thickened anterior mitral valve leaflet with rolled up margins, forming an aneurysm, with severe mitral regurgitation. Subsequently, the valve was evaluated intra-operatively for repair but eventually had to be excised and then successfully replaced with a bioprosthetic valve. Conclusions TEE is an excellent technique to confirm the diagnosis of a mitral valve leaflet aneurysm, and depending upon the severity of the defect, valve repair can be attempted but replacement becomes the most suitable treatment modality, once repair is deemed impossible. We hereby report a rare case, where timely diagnosis, appropriate surgical intervention and regular post-operative follow up helped in achieving good prognosis of this rare entity.

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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information System→Same topicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→