Dyspnea, Quality of Life and Walking Capacity during 1 Year Follow-up after a First Episode of Pulmonary Embolism: Results of the E.L.O.P.E. Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Most pulmonary embolism (PE) research has focused on outcomes such as mortality and PE recurrence. Patient-centered outcomes such as persistent dyspnea, impaired quality of life (QOL) and reduced walking capacity after PE have been largely unstudied. To address this knowledge gap, we performed the ELOPE (Evaluation of Longterm Outcomes after PE) study, a prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study of long-term outcomes after acute PE (www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01174628). Objectives: To describe and quantify dyspnea, quality of life and walking capacity during the 1 year following PE diagnosis. Methods: Patients ³ 18 years old with a 1st episode of acute PE diagnosed within the previous 10 days screened at 5 Canadian recruiting centers were potentially eligible to participate. Exclusion criteria were subsegmental-only PE, preexisting severe cardiopulmonary comorbidity, previous proximal DVT, contraindication to CT pulmonary angiography, life expectancy <1 year, unable to read questionnaire in English and French or to attend follow-up visits, and unable or unwilling to consent. At baseline, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after PE, we measured dyspnea (UCSD Shortness of Breath Questionnaire [SOBQ]), generic QOL (SF-36), PE-specific QOL (PEmbQoL), and walking capacity (6-minute walk test (6MWT)). Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) was performed at 1 year; the primary outcome of the study was maximal aerobic capacity defined by peak oxygen uptake (VO2) as a percent of predicted maximal VO2 (VO2max) on 1-year CPET, with <80% predicted VO2max considered abnormal, as per American Thoracic Society guidelines. For this analysis, we summarized demographic and clinical characteristics of study subjects, and calculated mean (SD) dyspnea scores, QOL scores and 6MWT distance at each study visit during 1 year follow-up in the total population and according to 1-year CPET result. Results: 984 patients were screened for participation; of these, 150 were eligible and 100 (67%) consented to participate. Mean (SD) age was 50 (15) years, 57% were male, 80% were outpatients and 33% had concomitant DVT. PE was provoked in 21% and unprovoked in 79%; none were cancer-related. During 1 year follow-up, SOBQ scores improved by an average of 16.9 points compared with baseline, SF-36 PCS (physical component score) by 9.0 points, SF-36 MCS (mental component score) by 5.6 points, PEmbQoL (e.g. intensity of complaints dimension) by 33.4 points, and 6MWT by 43 meters. Improvement tended to be more marked during the first 3 months after PE and tapered off thereafter. For all measures, degree of improvement was significantly reduced and 1 year scores were significantly worse among the 46.5% (40/86) of patients with <80% predicted VO2max on 1-year CPET (e.g., SF-36 PCS: see Figure). Conclusions: On average, dyspnea, QOL and walking capacity improve during the year after PE, most notably during the first 3 months after PE diagnosis. However, those patients with abnormal VO2max at 1 year had less improvement over time and worse 1 year scores for all measures, compared to those with normal VO2max at 1 year. Further analyses will focus on identifying clinical, biomarker and imaging-based determinants of dyspnea, poor QOL and reduced walking capacity at 1 year after PE. Funding: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP-93627) Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Wells: BMS/Pfizer: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».