Pulmonary Regurgitation Is an Important Determinant of Right Ventricular Contractile Dysfunction in Patients With Surgically Repaired Tetralogy of Fallot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evaluation of right ventricular (RV) function in patients with pulmonary regurgitation (PR) after tetralogy repair remains challenging because of abnormal RV loading conditions. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined 124 patients, aged 21+/-11.4 years, who had tetralogy repair at 3.7+/-3.5 years. By Doppler echocardiography, 33 patients had mild, 22 moderate, and 69 severe PR; 55 had significant tricuspid regurgitation (TR). Myocardial velocities, myocardial acceleration during isovolumic contraction (IVA), strain, and strain rate were measured at RV and LV base. Tricuspid valve annulus was measured in a 4-chamber view. QRS, QT, and JT intervals and their dispersions were measured from 12-lead electrocardiogram. IVA in the RV was lower in all patients compared with controls (0.8+/-0.4 versus 1.8+/-0.5, P<0.0001) and correlated with the severity of PR (r=-0.43, P<0.0001), whereas myocardial velocities, and strain/strain rate did not. LV IVA correlated with PR (r=-0.32, P<0.001) and with RV IVA (r=0.28, P<0.003). Patients with severe PR had a higher incidence of TR (r=0.69, P<0.0001) and lower RV IVA (1.0+/-0.4 versus 0.6+/-0.3, P<0.0001), a larger tricuspid valve ring diameter (P<0.0001), and prolonged electrical depolarization (P<0.001). Age at surgery or examination did not correlate with PR and with RV function assessed by IVA. In the RV, IVA correlated inversely with QRS duration (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Although load-dependent myocardial velocities and strain are not influenced by the severity of PR and presence of significant TR, IVA demonstrates reduced contractile function in relation to the degree of PR and may be an early, sensitive index for selecting patients for valve replacement.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".