Is septal glucose metabolism altered in patients with left bundle branch block and ischemic cardiomyopathy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is common in patients with heart failure (HF) and contributes to left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. The abnormal septal motion may alter septal metabolic demand but this has not been well characterized in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) and LV dysfunction. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of LBBB on septal metabolism in patients with ICM, LV dysfunction, and LBBB. METHODS: Fifty-three patients with LV dysfunction and ICM were identified: 34 with LBBB, 19 with normal QRS (</=100, control patients). PET using (18)F-FDG and (82)Rb was used to measure myocardial glucose metabolism and perfusion, respectively. Perfusion-metabolism differences were determined. Scar scores (matched decreases in (18)F-FDG and (82)Rb), mismatch scores (hibernating myocardium with decreased (82)Rb relative to (18)F-FDG), and reverse-mismatch (R-MM) scores (reduced (18)F-FDG relative to (82)Rb) were assessed in the septum and lateral wall. RESULTS: (18)F-FDG uptake in the septum was reduced in patients with LBBB (64.0% +/- 15.4%) compared with control patients (74.9% +/- 14.3%; P < 0.05). Mean septal R-MM was greater in patients with LBBB (19.1% +/- 15.3%) versus control patients (4.7% +/- 10.6%; P < 0.05). However, 32% (11/34) of patients with LBBB did not demonstrate septal R-MM, 91% (10/11) of whom demonstrated lateral wall perfusion defects. Of the 68% (23/34) of patients with LBBB and septal R-MM, 52% (12/23) demonstrated lateral wall perfusion defects (P < 0.05). There was a significant difference in the percentage of the lateral wall with scar between those with septal R-MM (9.3% +/- 10.5%) and those without (19.9% +/- 14.3%; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Previously, LBBB was believed to be characterized by reduced glucose metabolism relative to perfusion in the septum; however, this is not always the case in ICM. LBBB is not associated with septal R-MM in >30% of this patient population. Absence of this finding was often associated with lateral wall perfusion defects, suggesting an alteration in the metabolic demand on the septum. This may have implications for HF therapies such as resynchronization and requires further study.
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 | 0.001 | 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".