Atrial Dyssynchrony Syndrome: An Overlooked Phenomenon and a Potential Cause of ‘Diastolic’ Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The purpose of the present study was too explore the role of interatrial dyssynchrony in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: For the case study we selected seven patients with severe HFPEF, with interatrial block on electrocardiogram (ECG), and a delayed and interrupted A wave on mitral Doppler. Echocardiographic left atrial (LA) volumes/functions, mitral E/A and E/e' ratios, mitral A wave duration/deceleration time, and interatrial mechanical delays (IAMDs) at tissue Doppler, were studied. We performed right heart catheterization, and an electrophysiological study (EPS) for the measurement of interatrial conduction delay (IACD) and left atrioventricular interval (LAVI). Mean IAMD was 106 ms. All the patients exhibited a restrictive mitral Doppler pattern, high E/A and E/e' ratios, and short A wave duration/deceleration time. Left atrial volume was increased, with severely depressed functions. Right heart catheterization showed severe post-capillary pulmonary hypertension. The EPS showed an IACD of 170 ± 20 ms, with a short LAVI. Left atrial pacing through the coronary sinus reduced the IACD to 25 ± 15 ms. In the pilot study, 29 patients with HFPEF were compared with 27 age-matched control patients. HFPEF patients had longer P waves, shorter A waves, and a longer IAMD than the controls. Prevalence of severe IAMD >60 ms was 59% in HFPEF and 0% in controls. In the HFPEF group, patients with an IAMD >60 ms had significantly shorter A waves and higher E/e' ratio. CONCLUSION: Some HFPEF patients present with IACD, delayed LA systole, shortened LA emptying, decreased LA compliance, and increased filling pressures. Whether the condition of these patients could be improved by atrial resynchronization deserves further investigation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".