Systematic Assessment of Patients With Unexplained Cardiac Arrest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiac arrest without evident cardiac disease may be caused by subclinical genetic conditions. Provocative testing to unmask a phenotype is often necessary to detect primary electrical disease, direct genetic testing, and perform family screening. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with apparently unexplained cardiac arrest and no evident cardiac disease (normal cardiac function on echocardiogram, no evidence of coronary artery disease, and a normal ECG) underwent systematic evaluation that included cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, signal-averaged ECG, exercise testing, drug challenge, and selective electrophysiological testing. Diagnostic criteria were based on accepted criteria or provocation of the characteristic clinical features for long-QT syndrome, catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, Brugada syndrome, early repolarization, arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy, coronary spasm, and myocarditis. Sixty-three patients in 9 centers were enrolled (age 43.0+/-13.4 years, 29 women). A diagnosis was obtained in 35 patients (56%): Long-QT syndrome in 8, catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia in 8, arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy in 6, early repolarization in 5, coronary spasm in 4, Brugada syndrome in 3, and myocarditis in 1. Targeted genetic testing demonstrated evidence of causative mutations in 9 (47%) of 19 patients. Screening of 64 family members of these patients identified 15 affected individuals who were treated (24%). The remaining 28 patients (44%) were considered to have idiopathic ventricular fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic clinical testing, including drug provocation and advanced imaging, results in unmasking of the cause of apparently unexplained cardiac arrest in >50% of patients. This approach assists in directing genetic testing to diagnose genetically mediated arrhythmia syndromes, which results in successful family screening.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".