A symptom-related monitoring program following pulmonary embolism for the early detection of CTEPH: a prospective observational registry study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is a long-term complication following an acute pulmonary embolism (PE). It is frequently diagnosed at advanced stages which is concerning as delayed treatment has important implications for favourable clinical outcome. Performing a follow-up examination of patients diagnosed with acute PE regardless of persisting symptoms and using all available technical procedures would be both cost-intensive and possibly ineffective. Focusing diagnostic procedures therefore on only symptomatic patients may be a practical approach for detecting relevant CTEPH.This study aimed to evaluate if a follow-up program for patients with acute PE based on telephone monitoring of symptoms and further examination of only symptomatic patients could detect CTEPH. In addition, we investigated the role of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) as a diagnostic tool. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study all consecutive patients with newly diagnosed PE (n=170, 76 males, 94 females within 26 months) were recruited according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients were contacted via telephone and asked to answer standardized questions relating to symptoms. At the time of the final analysis 130 patients had been contacted. Symptomatic patients underwent a structured evaluation with echocardiography, CPET and complete work-up for CTEPH. RESULTS: 37.7%, 25.5% and 29.3% of the patients reported symptoms after three, six, and twelve months respectively. Subsequent clinical evaluation of these symptomatic patients saw 20.4%, 11.5% and 18.8% of patients at the respective three, six and twelve months time points having an echocardiography suggesting pulmonary hypertension (PH). CTEPH with pathological imaging and a mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) ≥ 25 mm Hg at rest was confirmed in eight subjects. Three subjects with mismatch perfusion defects showed an exercise induced increase of PAP without increasing pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP). Two subjects with pulmonary hypertension at rest and one with an exercise induced increase of mPAP with normal PAOP showed perfusion defects without echocardiographic signs of PH but a suspicious CPET. CONCLUSION: A follow-up program based on telephone monitoring of symptoms and further structured evaluation of symptomatic subjects can detect patients with CTEPH. CPET may serve as a complementary diagnostic tool.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".