Transition From Chronic Compensated to Acute Decompensated Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approximately half of all patients with chronic heart failure (HF) have a decreased ejection fraction (EF) (systolic HF [SHF]); the other half have HF with a normal EF (diastolic HF [DHF]). However, the underlying pathophysiological differences between DHF and SHF patients are incompletely defined. The purpose of this study was to use echocardiographic and implantable hemodynamic monitor data to examine the pathophysiology of chronic compensated and acute decompensated HF in SHF versus DHF patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were divided into 2 subgroups: 204 had EF <50% (SHF) and 70 had EF >or=50% (DHF). DHF patients had EF of 58+/-8%, end-diastolic dimension of 50+/-10 mm, estimated resting pulmonary artery diastolic pressure (ePAD) of 16+/-9 mm Hg, and diastolic distensibility index (ratio of ePAD to end-diastolic volume) of 0.11+/-0.06 mm Hg/mL. In contrast, SHF patients had EF of 24+/-10%, end-diastolic dimension of 68+/-11 mm, ePAD of 18+/-7 mm Hg, and diastolic distensibility index of 0.06+/-0.04 mm Hg/mL (P<0.05 versus DHF for all variables except ePAD). In SHF and DHF patients who developed acute decompensated HF, these events were associated with a significant increase in ePAD, from 17+/-7 to 22+/-7 mm Hg (P<0.05) in DHF and from 21+/-9 to 24+/-8 mm Hg (P<0.05) in SHF. As a group, patients who did not have acute decompensated HF events had no significant changes in ePAD. CONCLUSIONS: Significant structural and functional differences were found between patients with SHF and those with DHF; however, elevated diastolic pressures play a pivotal role in the underlying pathophysiology of chronic compensated and acute decompensated HF in both SHF and DHF.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".