Relationship Between Degree of Left Ventricular Dysfunction, Symptom Status, and Risk of Embolic Events in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Limited data exists regarding the relationship between left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and heart failure (HF) symptoms and embolic risk among patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: Participants in the Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial With Irbesartan for Prevention of Vascular Events (ACTIVE) trials with HF, but not randomized to oral anticoagulation, were categorized as having preserved versus reduced ejection fraction. If reduced, LVSD was classified as mild, moderate, or severe. Symptoms were quantified using New York Heart Association class.The primary outcome was a composite of stroke, transient ischemic attack, and systemic embolism. RESULTS: There were 3487 antiplatelet-treated patients with HF at baseline. Of these patients, 969 (46.8%) had HF with preserved ejection fraction and 1103 (53.2%) had HF with reduced ejection fraction. During 3.6 years of mean follow-up, first occurrence of stroke, transient ischemic attack, or systemic embolism occurred in 386 patients.The strongest independent predictors of embolic events were age ≥75 years (hazard ratio 2.55; confidence interval, 1.85-3.53), prior stroke or transient ischemic attack (hazard ratio 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.65-2.60), and female sex (hazard ratio 1.37; confidence interval, 1.11-1.69). However, ejection fraction <0.50, degree of LVSD, and New York Heart Association class did not predict embolic events. Patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction exhibited similar risk of embolic events as those with HR with reduced ejection fraction: 4.3% versus 4.4% per 100 person-years (hazard ration 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.31). Risk of embolic events was similar across categories of LVSD (P for trend =0.96) and New York Heart Association class (P for trend =0.57). CONCLUSION: Among HF patients in ACTIVE, neither the presence of LVSD or degree of symptom severity influenced risk of embolic events.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".