Talk:Tetralogy of Fallot

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2019 and 1 February 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lablabz. Peer reviewers: Poodle0011.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 September 2021 and 14 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ksoccer22. Peer reviewers: Gracehelgeson, Ethanstashek, WLepidemiology.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2021 and 8 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hajibolf, Manakbajaj20, Esa0705.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Claims about prevalence of various cyanotic defects

The article used to contain a claim that ToF was the most common cyanotic defect only after one month of age, because D-TGA was more common but the arterial switch procedure had 50% mortality. I revised the claim to make it more coherent but, now, after referring to Nadas' Pediatric Cardiology, 2ed, pages 559 "tetralogy of fallot..is the most common cyanotic defect" and 655 (exhibit 37-2, showing 96% survival at 18 months after arterial switch procedure) I am just removing it. Please *do not* put it back unless you can explain the profound discrepancy between what the article said and what the standard reference work (Nadas) for the field says.

Tls (talk) 02:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Naming

Who was Fallot? -- Zoe

A french doctor (pathologist) in Marseille: Fallot, Etienne L. A., 1850 - 1911, who described in 1888, that these (3 or) 4 malformations belong together. Ers 06:08, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC). See the wiki.

Personal Experiences

hi..wish to hear from anyone who was born with fallot. does it impede your physical abilities? if so to what extent..plz post reply here —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.216.194.19 (talk) 19:37, 8 October 2005

I'm sure you mean well, but soliciting replies to vague questions on the talk page is not using Wikipedia as it's intended. Also, please sign messages using 4 tildes {~) Dave 22:53, 8 October 2005 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moormand (talk • contribs) 22:53, 8 October 2005

TOF patients status post total surgical repair can range from New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class I through IV. What this means is that those in class I have normal or near normal endurance. Near normal might mean that they can do most things but become tired a little faster than others if they do something very aerobic like distance running. Those in class IV are confined to a chair or bed and even so, have symptoms of breathlessness even while at rest. That's a really big range of function.

I don't know enough to tell you what causes a patient to end up in class I after surgery or class IV. I would guess it might have something to do with the severity of the defect to begin with and with the experience of the surgical center.

I do know that, generally, patients with more recent surgical corrections, with modern techniques, are faring better on average than patients who had surgical corrections in the 1950s, 60s and 70s.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Woodcore (talk • contribs) 06:13, 20 January 2007

I too was born with Fallot's, had surgery in 1980 and am due for corrective surgery sometime this year. My endurance for walking is excellent, but in other areas I wear out easily and heat up to the point of feverish during the night. Am curious as to what my rights are in getting hold of images of the operation and adding them to this article. Mistyschism 10:53 & 11:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC) This contrib has been relocated from inside a previous contrib, to immediately following it. --Jerzy•t 17:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

68.126.63.22 04:22, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
I was born with Fallot. I was operated on when I was three years old. I am in very good shape and have exceptional cardio vascular endurance. Granted I am 6'1" 160 LBS, and I am not sure how I compare with other 20 year olds of similar body types. I would also like to add a question.
Does this defect disqualify you from the US Military? 68.126.63.22 04:22, 21 September 2006 (UTC)Ryan A Newton

IS it genetic ?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.1.151.38 (talk) 22:35, 3 April 2007

This discussion of Fallot in terms of its personal (or family) relevance to those discussing is contrary to the purpose of this WP talk page (which is designed to help editors plan, and work out disagreements about, the contents of the accompanying encyclopedia article).

I can't promise you that continuation of this kind of discussion on the Wikipedia server will be tolerated at all, but it would make a much better case for being tolerated if it were conducted in the "User talk" namespace of Wikipedia. The quickest way to do that is for one of you to place a link in this "Personal Experiences" section, inviting those interested to continue the discussion on their own Wikipedia User-talk page. If that occurs (or someone new with sufficient interest appears soon), i will be glad to provide technical assistance for moving the existing contents of this section to that User-talk page, setting up a sub-page specifically for the discussion, and perhaps other useful tricks. But the goal is to reduce the footprint on this page, of this kind of discussion, to a box containing a brief welcome & description of the discussion's scope, and a click-here link to that User-talk-namespace page.

(In the absence of current interest in doing that, i will propose that i move this section to a sub-page of this talk page to keep the previous discussion accessible, and write-protect that sub-page to prevent further discussion there.) In any case, one should that expect further discussion of this kind is likely to be tolerated on this page only to the extent of making arrangements that serve to discourage further such discussion here.

--Jerzy•t 17:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Click here to add an image of yourself (optional). Important information for minors

I am a 30yr old female who was born with a heart condition called tetrology of fallot. I had my first surgury at 3yrs old and another at age 21 to recorrect the valve that had been put in at age 3. Since then I have lived a healthy life and have a beautiful 8yr old son. Which is amazing since I was always told I should never have children because my heart would not tolerate child birthing, boy did I prove them wrong!! I do have sum shortness of breath at times and heart palpitations but I keep up with my cardiologist evry few months. Yet I don't give myself any limitations to what I can do I live a normal life.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiluv81 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

School project

I hope no one minds that I added a link to my website on ToF. It was for a school project, and the link was rather long so I just linked it through Wikipedia for easy access and for referral as all the facts have been checked.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.249.67.243 (talk • contribs) 03:03, 12 June 2006

Diagram

What is wrong with the diagram? It isn't legible in the thumbnail view, but if you click on it to see a larger image, the image box is blank. ++Arx Fortis 20:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Three/Four

70.43.215.54 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) changed "four" to "three" in the lead sent, producing

...classically has three anatomical components.

I'm not sure whether it's vandalism, or an awkward attempt to deal with the secondary symptom, by someone who doesn't grasp that "tetra-" means four, or perhaps how much of a qualification "classically" amounts to. In any case, i think the 3/4 issue can be dealt with better than what was there before 70's change. Here's my try:

...classically understood to involve four anatomical abnormalities (although only three of them are always present).

--Jerzy•t 22:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Good edit - just a couple of inquiries here. First, there is a clear distinction between the three "classical" components (which are congenital) and the fourth, which seems to develop over time as the heart attempts to compensate. Can the words somehow reflect this? Second, some sources would suggest that the three "classical" components may vary greatly in presence. To the point that one might essentially be absent.

So - not wanting to edit your words unilaterally - how about something like "...classically understood to involve four anatomical abnormalities (although initially only three of them are typically present)."? Ian Adam (talk) 19:54, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Stigler's law

I removed

This is potentially an example of Stigler's law of eponymy.

(I think "potentially" was probably supposed to mean "if the conjecture that it's a law pans out, but never mind.) I certainly is too peripheral to be in the lead 'graph, and i'd say that as far as it should go is that if a Category:Examples of Stigler's law is created, it probably would deserve the tag.
The observation that it seems to be an example is not worthless, so i'm starting a List of examples of Stigler's law article to preserve it in.
--Jerzy•t 22:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Pulmonary Stenosis

re: "The pulmonic stenosis is the major cause of the malformations, with the other associated malformations acting as compensatory mechanisms to the pulmonic stenosis."

I am struggling to understand what the above statement is trying to express, can it be expressed better? Is the point of the statement to say that the pulmonary stenosis is the most significant pathology in TOF, accounting for its key features?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jubalj (talk • contribs) 01:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

This article is sold on Amazon for $10

"Tetralogy of Fallot Medical Guide," by Qontro Medical Guides, appears to be this article. Amazon is selling it for $9.99. Is it legal to sell Wikipedia articles?--TDKehoe (talk) 23:41, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes. See Wikipedia:Copyrights. --Arcadian (talk) 00:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Chromosomal Cause

The article says the Tetralogy "is associated with chromosome 22 deletions...".

A patient I know of has classical Tetralogy, and testing revealed reversals on chromosome 9 instead. Can anyone elaborate on this? Are there potentially different causes? Ian Adam (talk) 17:27, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

55% are present?

"They require, therefore, follow up in specialized adult congenital heart disease centres. 55% are present." What does the 55% refer to?

2001:630:212:DE0:91B6:EDB8:7801:E44C (talk) 23:09, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Agree and trimmed Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:50, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Medical Student Edit

Hello! I am a 4th year medical student pursuing a career in pediatric medicine. I enrolled in the Wikiproject course offered at my school. I am honored to participate in this unique opportunity to review and add to medical information available on Wikipedia. I ultimately hope that some readers will find my work beneficial.

During this month-long course, I will be reviewing and editing this page to provide reliable referenced information. This article is currently a C class high importance topic. I will improve this page by:

-Introduction: The introduction is well referenced. However, I would like to introduce additions and modifications for a more systematic presentation of comprehensive information.

-Signs and Symptoms: This section provides a good list of many symptoms of TOF. In addition to adding citations to the current information I will add information about the most common presenting symptoms of TOF. Also, this paragraph starts with explaining the pathophysiology of TOF. I will re-write the intro to this paragraph as to make it more in-line to the “signs and symptoms” of TOF and introduce hyperlinks to integrate with the pathophysiology section. The article lacks a complications section -that would be a subsection of the Signs and Symptoms section. I will attempt to develop a complications section that will discuss complications of not treating TOF as well as corrected TOF complications.

-Pathophysiology: This section is well written and referenced in terms of the pathophysiology relating to the 4 malformations present in TOF. I will introduce information about the right to left shunt present in TOF at the start of the section. I will also add references as needed.

-Treatment: This section does a good job in introducing the historical treatments of TOF. I wish to develop it further by elaborating on current medical and surgical treatments. I will also present these treatment in a plausible order in which they might be tried. Citations will be added for a more robust section.

-Epidemiology: Could benefit from referencing.

-I will also add an image to this article. The section to which I will add the picture is yet to be identified.

I look forward to editing this article. Suggestions and opinions are welcome! Thank you Lablabz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lablabz (talk • contribs) 11:46, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Great welcome. I have simplified and condensed what you added to the lead. Lead should be kept as a fairly short summary. Moved some of the added text to the body. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:18, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello! I am a medical student in the same course as Lablabz and have a few comments as a peer reviewer of your editing of the article.

• Intro: I feel that it may be too detailed for a simple introduction. Maybe shorten it to 1-2 sentences max per topic. You can leave out the history portion for example since it is longer in the summary section than in the history portion.
• Signs and Symptoms: You definitely achieved the goals you set out to do! The first sentence might be a bit too long. You are still missing citations in some places, for example "the primary symptom is low blood oxygen saturation..." and "may result in hypoxic brain injury and death". You are also using some complicated words that most people wouldn't understand such as "dyspnea, clubbing, polycythemia, cyanosis". I think your last paragraph is a good example of great explanations, easy language, and good citations. You explain systemic vascular resistance and it had >1 citation to suport it.
• Pathophysiology: It seems like it might have been strong to begin with. The only comment I have is that it would be great if the normal heart picture was labeled so that the reader can refer back to that picture when studying the table so they know where the pulmonic valve is for example. You are also missing citations in the last 2 paragraphs of the "four malformations" section and the last paragraph of additional anomalies.
• Diagnosis: did you find a picture of an echo? I think that would add more value than your current picture. Also the color doppler link is broken since the page doesnt exist.
• Treatment: This was my favorite section. I would maybe switch the total surgical repair with palliative surgery sub-section. I think the reader cares more about the up-to-date treatment than the historical treatment.
• Epidemiology: could benefit from some of the info you put in the summary section. I would actually switch those around, put what you have in the intro in the epidemiology section and vice-versa.

Overall, I think this is a great edition of this article. It could still benefit from additional citations, simplification of wording (or explanations), as well as shortening the summary section a little bit. Good job and let me know if you have questions! Poodle0011 (talk) 00:15, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Vivien Thomas

Ref says "Thomas was a major contributor in the development of operative techniques."

We already say "with Vivien Thomas also providing substantial contributions and listed as an assistant"

Yes on OR records if you are not the lead surgeon you get listed as an assistant. That does not indicate a slight. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:55, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Health Information Undergraduate Student

Hi! I am a 4th year undergraduate student taking a health information inquiry course. For this class, I will be editing this article page, adding a new section about complications and additional information for the epidemiology section. Please feel free to list more sections that need an improvement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manakbajaj20 (talk • contribs) 01:09, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tetralogy of Fallot/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vaticidalprophet (talk · contribs) 14:58, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Picking this up. Vaticidalprophet 14:58, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

I'll unfortunately need to quickfail this article per WP:GAFAIL criteria 1, as it would require serious, foundational work to reach the Good Article standard.

This article has seen recent substantial edits from Wiki Ed editors, which have introduced noticeable tone problems to the article. For instance, the "Related disorders" section introduced by Wiki Ed editors is written from the perspective of a medical professional writing advice to other medical professionals (see phrasing such as "For a differential diagnosis, comparisons between these disorders provides valuable knowledge"), which diverges from the tone expected for an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia's medical articles are written for multiple audiences, and should not be written under the assumption readers are themselves medical professionals.

The article also has issues with both repetitive/irrelevant content and overly brutal summary style, making some sections overlong and others too short. For instance, while attention is given to the role of genetics in TOF in several places, this is rarely presented in a way useful to the reader. The "Causes" section gives a long list of potential genetic causes of TOF, but it's almost completely decontextualized; rare and common mutations are presented beside each other without being properly compared. Genetic etiologies are mentioned again under "Diagnosis", but in a single line about velocardiofacial syndrome screening. "Causes" also gives a significant amount of text to environmental etiologies, but in decontextualized and often irrelevant ways, veering off into discussion of unrelated conditions with similar causes and failing to disambiguate TOF risk from all CHD risk.

There are also significant prose and MOS issues throughout the article. I suggest anyone interested in pursuing GA status further request a WP:GOCE pre-GAN copyedit.

The article's nominator has not edited since 9 December, and the other recent significant editor since 5 December. For this reason, and the broader fact Wiki Ed editors often don't return to the project after completion of their course, I've concluded a prompt response is unlikely and holding the review open for a long period will probably not get these issues addressed. The issues with this article are significant enough that handling them in a single GAN would be implausible, and this is only compounded by the inactivity of significant contributors. I've left these notes nonetheless, because this is a core medical article and I'd like to see it GA someday, and this will hopefully be of use to anyone able to rewrite. Vaticidalprophet 02:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)