Left atrial remodelling in patients with myocardial infarction complicated by heart failure, left ventricular dysfunction, or both: the VALIANT Echo Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To assess the relationship between left atrial (LA) size and outcome after high-risk myocardial infarction (MI) and to study dynamic changes in LA size during long-term follow-up. METHODS AND RESULTS: The VALIANT Echocardiography study prospectively enrolled 610 patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, heart failure (HF), or both following MI. We assessed LA volume indexed to body surface area (LAVi) at baseline, 1 month, and 20 months after MI. Baseline LAVi was an independent predictor of all-cause death or HF hospitalization (P = 0.004). In patients who survived to 20 months, LAVi increased a mean of 3.00 +/- 7.08 mL/m(2) from baseline. Hypertension, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, and LV mass were the only baseline independent predictors of LA remodelling. Changes in LA size were related to worsening in MR and increasing in LV volumes. LA enlargement during the first month was significantly greater in patients who subsequently died or were hospitalized for HF than in patients without events. CONCLUSION: Baseline LA size is an independent predictor of death or HF hospitalization following high-risk MI. Moreover, LA remodelling during the first month after infarction is associated with adverse outcome.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".