Changes in exercise haemodynamics during treatment in pulmonary arterial hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Improvement in exercise capacity may not be associated with significant changes in resting pulmonary haemodynamics. The present prospective study documented the relationships between improvement in 6-min walking distance (6MWD) and changes in resting and exercise pulmonary haemodynamics after treatment in patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH). A total of 42 IPAH patients underwent supine submaximal exercise haemodynamic assessments at baseline and after 5+/-2 months of therapy. The 6MWD, the corresponding chronotropic response (peak minus resting heart rate), and resting and exercise haemodynamic variables were analysed. The isoflow was defined as the lowest of the pre- and post-treatment peak cardiac index (CI). The extrapolated isoflow mean pulmonary artery pressure ((pa)) was used to characterise changes in (pa)-CI regression lines following treatment. Patients were given bosentan (n = 28), epoprostenol (n = 12) or both. The 6MWD increased significantly, from 399+/-88 to 442+/-86 m. On univariate analysis, changes in 6MWD correlated with changes in isoflow (pa), chronotropic response, resting haemodynamics (CI, pulmonary vascular resistance and mixed venous oxygen saturation) and exercise haemodynamics (peak CI). On multivariate analysis, only changes in isoflow (pa) and chronotropic response were independently associated with changes in 6MWD. Improvement in exercise tolerance with chronic therapy is independently related to improvement in pulmonary haemodynamics measured in exercise but not in resting conditions.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".