Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy: Typical and Atypical Variants, A Two-Year Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Typical or classical takotsubo cardiomyopathy (TCM) is associated with the characteristic abnormality of a ballooned left ventricular apex with basal segmental hyperkinesis. TCM may not present with the "classical" wall motion abnormalities but can have a variety of segmental wall motion abnormalities. The aim of our work was to assess for any unique identifying factors that can help distinguish typical and atypical variants of TCM. METHODS: We studied 11 consecutive patients between 2010 and 2012 admitted with chest pain, electrocardiographic and cardiac biomarker changes consistent with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent left heart angiography and were clinically diagnosed to have TCM. RESULTS: Our study found no specific features distinguishing typical and atypical variants of TCM. In our study, all patients were female and all had excellent outcome. One patient was in fourth decade of life, three patients in fifth and sixth decade of life, while remaining were older. One patient had diabetes mellitus, five had hypertension, four had concurrent coronary artery disease, but no patient had any family history of TCM. Nine of 11 patients had immediate clear-cut stressors. Three patients had normal ECG, two with ST segment elevation, with nine patients having only modest troponin elevations. One patient had an anomalous RCA take-off from the right coronary cusp, otherwise remaining patients had normal anatomy. One patient had only apical involvement, remaining had multiple wall motion abnormalities, and all patients had involvement of the anterior wall. Four patients had apical sparing. No inverted TCM pattern with basal akinesis with normal wall motion in the midventricular and apical regions was found among our patients. CONCLUSIONS: We report that the classification of TCM as typical versus atypical is probably not clinically meaningful. The regional wall motion abnormalities are related to catecholamine excess and to the susceptibility of that particular region to excess catecholamine. We do not know why such differences in regional susceptibility exist, and agree with the other authors that sub-classification would only add to confusion, and a delay in understanding of the disease process.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".