The cardiac response to exercise in cirrhosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Impaired exercise capacity and oxygen consumption are common in cirrhosis. AIM: To explore the relationship between possible myocardial dysfunction and exercise tolerance in cirrhosis. METHODS: Cardiac responses to exercise, using radionuclide angiography and graded upright cycle ergometry with oxygen consumption, were assessed before and after exercise in 39 cirrhotics patients and compared with 12 age and sex matched healthy volunteers. Baseline cardiac chamber dimensions and wall thickness, ejection fraction, and diastolic function were measured using two dimensional echocardiography is all subjects. RESULTS: Baseline diastolic dysfunction with prolonged isovolumic relaxation times (p=0.02), left atrial enlargement, and left ventricular wall thickening were present in all cirrhotics (p=0.02), despite increased mean ejection fraction. With graded exercise, cirrhotics achieved 71 (4)% (p=0.03) (pre-ascitics) and 46 (3)% (p<0.001) (ascitics) of predicted work loads, respectively, without significant increases in ejection fraction. The smaller absolute and percentage increases in cardiac output (p=0.003) in the cirrhotics were associated with significantly reduced oxygen consumption (p=0.003) and anaerobic threshold (p<0.001), and correlated significantly with work and metabolic parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Impaired exercise capacity in cirrhosis is associated with myocardial thickening and ventricular stiffness leading to decreased diastolic function, inotropic and chronotropic incompetence under conditions of stress, with metabolic consequences. This picture is compatible with the condition now known as cirrhotic cardiomyopathy.
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".