Risk factors for progression of aortic arch calcification in patients on maintenance hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vascular calcification is accelerated during dialysis and is known to be an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Progression of aortic arch calcification (AoAC) can be simply estimated with an AoAC score (AoACS) using plain chest radiography. The objective of this study was to evaluate risk factors for AoAC progression. The enrolled subjects were 125 newly treated hemodialysis patients and 59 peritoneal dialysis patients. In the patients who had undergone chest radiography before initial dialysis therapy and every year, we estimated AoACS and then divided the patients into two groups based on the presence or absence of AoAC progression. We also compared the baseline clinical and biochemical profiles in the two groups. Eighty-five (46.2%) were men (mean age, 58.6 ± 12.7 years). Seventy-six patients (41.3%) had AoAC before initial dialysis, with a mean AoACS of 13.0 ± 20.4%. The mean duration of follow-up was 2.7 ± 1.0 years. Half of the patients (50%) had progressive AoAC. Age >65 years (p = 0.003), dialysis duration (p = 0.004), diabetes (p = 0.015), and the presence of AoAC at baseline (p = 0.001) were related to AoAC progression. No significant association was found between AoAC progression and the baseline clinical parameters, including gender, obesity, hypertension, and dialysis modality. In a multivariate analysis, dialysis duration (p = 0.003) and the presence of AoAC at baseline (p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for AoAC progression in patients undergoing dialysis. The duration of dialysis and the presence of AoAC before initial dialysis were significantly related to the progression of AoAC in these patients. The results suggest that patients should be carefully managed from the predialysis stage to prevent AoAC progression and to reduce cardiovascular morbidity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".