MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1160481687 · doi:10.1016/j.ipej.2015.07.009

Delayed AICD therapy and cardiac arrest resulting from undersensing of ventricular fibrillation in a subject with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy–A case report

2015· article· en· W1160481687 on OpenAlexaff
Ashley Chin, Jeff S. Healey, Carlos S. Ribas, Girish M. Nair

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of OttawaHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyDefibrillation thresholdVentricular fibrillationDefibrillationInternal medicineImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorHypertrophic cardiomyopathySudden cardiac death

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Defibrillation testing is no longer routinely performed after automatic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (AICD) implantation. However, certain subjects undergoing AICD implantation may be at higher risk of undersensing of ventricular arrhythmias resulting in potentially fatal outcomes. We present the case of a 30-year-old woman with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM; 'asymmetric septal hypertophy' morphologic variant) and prophylactic AICD who experienced an out of hospital cardiac arrest. AICD interrogation revealed undersensing as a result of intermittent high amplitude electrograms during an episode of ventricular fibrillation (VF). The subject underwent replacement and repositioning of the AICD lead along with pulse generator replacement (that utilized a different VF sensing algorithm) with appropriate sensing of VF and successful defibrillation testing. The presence of intermittent high amplitude electrograms during episodes of VF in AICDs using the AGC function should be recognized as a situation that may necessitate interventions to prevent undersensing and consequent delay in therapy.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.667

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Pacing and Electrophysiology JournalSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207