Management of pediatric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: As the underlying genetic basis of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is being characterized, there has been increasing recognition of the wide spectrum and variable evolution of this disease within the pediatric age range. This review outlines recent evidence relevant to the diagnosis, management, and prognosis of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy specific to children and adolescents. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies of putative causal genes are leading to the discovery of factors affecting the variability of phenotypic expression and possible avenues for new therapies. Nonetheless, the use of genetic testing currently remains for research purposes only. Echocardiography is the primary means for evaluation, with an increasing focus on diastolic performance. Useful prognostic information can be obtained from the safe performance of cardiopulmonary stress testing. Sudden death can occur in children, although the risk factors are likely different than in adults. The role and mechanisms for possible ischemia remain controversial, and likely differ between individuals. Activity restrictions are recommended, with medical therapy reserved for those who are symptomatic. For those with important left ventricular outflow obstruction, surgical myectomy may be indicated, with little current role for alcohol septal ablation. Advances in implantable defibrillators now make this therapy feasible in younger children. SUMMARY: There are important differences from adults in the approach to the diagnosis and management of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in children and adolescents. Care regarding prognostication and therapy must be taken given the potential life-long implications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".