Effect of Cardiac Resynchronization on Myocardial Efficiency and Regional Oxidative Metabolism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated increased left ventricular contractility with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) using atriobiventricular stimulation. This study evaluated the effect of CRT on myocardial oxidative metabolism and efficiency. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eight patients with New York Heart Association functional class III-IV congestive heart failure were studied during atrial pacing (control) and atriobiventricular stimulation at the same rate. The monoexponential clearance rate of [11C]acetate (k(mono)) was measured with positron emission tomography to assess myocardial oxidative metabolism in the left and right ventricles (LV and RV, respectively). Myocardial efficiency was measured using the work metabolic index (WMI). Stroke volume index improved by 10% (P=0.011) with CRT, although both global LV and RV k(mono) were unchanged compared with control. Septal k(mono) increased by 15% (P=0.04), and the septal/lateral wall k(mono) ratio increased by 22% (P=0.01). WMI increased by 13% (P=0.024) with CRT. CONCLUSIONS: CRT improves LV function without increasing global LV oxidative metabolism, resulting in improved myocardial efficiency. Oxidative metabolism of the interventricular septum increases relative to the lateral wall, which suggests successful resynchronization.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".