MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 12969: Rapid Nonsustained Ventricular Tachycardia Detected by Continuous Device Monitoring for Risk Stratification in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Redefining a Traditional Risk Marker

2014· article· en· W1604133079 on OpenAlexaff
Karthik Viswanathan, Adrian Suszko, Nicholas Jackson, Douglas Cameron, Danna Spears, Harry Rakowski, Anna Woo, Mamta Khurana, Vijay S. Chauhan

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyHypertrophic cardiomyopathyVentricular tachycardiaImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorSudden cardiac deathOdds ratioCardiomyopathyImplantRisk factorSurgeryHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Nonsustained VT (NSVT) detected by Holter (Holter +NSVT) is a major risk factor (RF) for sudden cardiac death (SCD) in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). We hypothesized that using a higher heart rate cut-off and prolonged monitoring for detecting NSVT would improve its accuracy in predicting sustained ventricular arrhythmias (VA). Methods: We prospectively enrolled 56 patients (mean 44±14 yrs) with HCM, who had a preexisting prophylactic ICD. We assessed the prevalence of rapid NSVT (+RNSVT, ≥4 beats at 167-200 bpm) detected by their ICD within the first 12 months of implant. The primary outcome was appropriate ICD therapy after implant. Results: The prevalence of RF at ICD implant was 50% for syncope, 57% for Holter +NSVT, 45% for +family history SCD, and 25% for septum ≥ 30mm. The prevalence of 0, 1, 2 and ≥3 RF was 2, 32, 54 and 13%, respectively. +RNSVT occurred in 19 patients (34%) of whom 4 were Holter -NSVT. When compared to -RNSVT, those with +RNSVT had less syncope (21 vs 65%, p=0.004) but more Holter +NSVT (79 vs 46%, p=0.02). Over a median follow-up of 59 (25, 123) months after ICD implant, 8 patients had ≥1 appropriate ICD therapy from VA. According to the number of RF, the proportion of patients with VA was 0=0%, 1=6%, 2=13%, ≥3=43% (p=0.11). +RNSVT was associated with higher VA compared to Holter +NSVT (Figure 1A). +RNSVT predicted VA by Cox regression analysis, both univariate [odds ratio 10, 95% CI 1-84, p=0.03] and adjusted for differences in RF [adjusted odds ratio 11, 95% CI 1-114, p=0.046]. ROC analysis for +RNSVT (area under curve 0.78, p=0.02) showed the optimal cut-point to be RNSVT ≥2 episodes (Figure 1B) for discriminating patients with and without VA (Sensitivity 71%, Specificity 83%, PPV 38%, NPV 95%). Conclusions: RNSVT detected from continuous device monitoring is an independent predictor of VA in HCM patients and a better risk stratifier than Holter +NSVT. The role of implantable loop monitoring to detect RNSVT and evaluate VA risk in HCM warrants study

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies→French-language works237,207→