Grading diastolic function by echocardiography: hemodynamic validation of existing guidelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While echocardiographic grading of left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction (DD) is used every day, the relationship between echocardiographic DD grade and hemodynamic abnormalities is uncertain. METHODS: We identified 460 consecutive patients who underwent transthoracic echocardiography within 24 h of elective left heart catheterization and had: normal sinus rhythm, no confounding structural heart disease, no change in medications between catheterization and echo, and complete echocardiographic data. Patients were grouped based on echocardiographic DD grade. Hemodynamic tracings were used to determine time constant of isovolumic pressure decay (Tau), LV end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) and end-diastolic volume index at a pressure of 20 mmHg (EDVi20). RESULTS: Normal diastolic function was found in 55 (12.0%) patients, while 132 (28.7%) patients had grade 1, 156 (33.9%) grade 2 and 117 (25.4%) grade 3 DD. The median value for Tau was 46.9 ms for the overall population (interquartile range 38.6-58.1 ms), with a prevalence of a prolonged Tau (>48 ms) of 47.5%. While there was an association between DD grade and Tau (p = 0.003), LV dysfunction (ejection fraction <50%) was more strongly associated with increased Tau (p < 0.001) than was DD grade (p = 0.19). There was also an association between DD grade and LVEDP (p < 0.001), with both LV dysfunction (p = 0.029) and DD grade (p < 0.001) independently associated with LVEDP. Calculated EDVi20 was related to DD grade, but this relationship was driven by findings of paradoxically increased compliance in patients with severe DD. CONCLUSIONS: Although echocardiographic grading of DD was related to invasive hemodynamics in this population, the relationship was modest.
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 | 0.019 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".