Hemodialysis decreases carotid‐brachial and carotid‐femoral pulse wave velocities: A 5‐year follow‐up study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aortic stiffness is a prognostic parameter associated with patient mortality. Vascular access creation has been shown to have effects on arterial stiffness both in the aorta and in the upper limb arteries in chronically hemodialyzed patients (CHPs). However, no longitudinal studies have been conducted in order to characterize the evolution of arterial stiffness in CHPs. The aims of this work were (a) to measure baseline pulse wave velocity (PWV) in the carotid-femoral and in right and left carotid-brachial pathways in a cohort of CHP and (b) to conduct a 5-year prospective study on the same cohort to determine possible time-related differences. Pulse wave velocity was measured both in the carotid-femoral and in the carotid-brachial pathways, and clinical and biochemical parameters were collected in 25 CHPs, which were followed up after a 5-year lapse. Right and left carotid-brachial pathway PWV values showed significant decreases after the 5-year follow-up, independently of the presence of the vascular access (P < 0.001). Additionally, baseline carotid-brachial PWV was significantly higher (P < 0.001) than values measured 5 years later for upper limbs with vascular access (11.97 ± 2.97 m/sec vs. 6.76 ± 1.48 m/sec, respectively) and without vascular access (12.25 ± 2.38 m/sec vs. 7.18 ± 1.88 m/sec, respectively). Similarly, PWV values in the carotid-femoral pathway decreased significantly (P < 0.001) over the same period (13.27 ± 2.96 m/sec vs. 9.75 ± 2.99 m/sec, respectively). The 5-year follow-up of PWV showed significant decreases in both carotid-brachial and carotid-femoral pathways. The general changes in arterial stiffness could be related to the vascular access creation, hemodialysis therapy, and to the improvement of arterial pressure management.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".