Clinical outcome and left ventricular remodeling in AMI patients with insufficient myocardial reperfusion after recanalization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) is effective in predicting myocardial viability and functional recovery on a segmental level in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). In this study, we investigated whether insufficient myocardial reperfusion plays an important role in left ventricular (LV) remodeling and functional recovery in patients with thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade 3 and corrected TIMI frame count (CTFC) < 40 after recanalization of the infarct-related artery. METHOD: Patients underwent intracoronary injection of microbubbles for echocardiographic assessment of myocardial microvascular perfusion, wall motion score, LV volume and ejection function (EF) at baseline, 30 minutes, one month and six months after recanalization. The patients with MCESI < 1 were considered to have insufficient myocardial reperfusion (group A, n=11), while the patients with MCESI≥1 were considered to have sufficient myocardial reperfusion (group B, n=47) after AMI recanalization. RESULTS: The wall motion score index (WMSI) and the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) showed significant improvement at 1 month and 6 months in group B, but only at six months in group A. Left ventricular end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes (LVESV and LVEDV) were also significantly decreased at one and six months in group B. WMSI, LVESV, LVEDV and LVEF were significantly improved in group B in comparison with group A at one month and six months (P < 0.01). By six months, significant correlations were seen in all patients between MCESI and changes in LVESV, LVEDV and LVEF at 6 months. Similar correlations were observed between the myocardial regional blood flow (Q) and changes in LVESV , LVEDV and LVEF. CONCLUSION: Insufficient myocardial reperfusion was a strong independent predictor of LV remodeling and functional recovery in AMI patients with TIMI flow grade 3 and CTFC < 40 after recanalization. MCE has important additional value for prognosis and risk assessment in patients with acute myocardial infarction following recanalization.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".