Sex Differences in the Associations of Hemodynamic Load With Left Ventricular Hypertrophy and Concentric Remodeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and concentric remodeling are associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes. We hypothesized that measures of arterial load are associated with LVH and concentric remodeling, and that associations differ by sex. METHODS: We studied 600 non-Hispanic whites (59% women) belonging to hypertensive sibships. By integrating arterial tonometry with echocardiography, we obtained the following hemodynamic measures: aortic characteristic impedance (Z c), proximal aortic compliance (PAC), systemic vascular resistance, augmentation index, and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV). LVH and concentric remodeling were assessed by left ventricular mass indexed to body surface area (LVMI) and relative wall thickness (RWT), respectively. LVMI was log-transformed to reduce skewness. Hemodynamic measures were indexed to body size. Sex-specific multivariable linear regression analyses adjusting for confounders were performed to assess the associations of measures of arterial load with log LVMI and RWT. RESULTS: None of the hemodynamic measures were associated with LVMI in either sex, or with RWT in men. However, in women, measures of aortic stiffness and early, pulsatile hemodynamic load were independently associated with increased RWT: β ± SE = 0.008 ± 0.004 for Z c; 0.003 ± 0.001 for cfPWV, and -0.009 ± 0.003 for PAC (P ≤ 0.05 for each). Female sex was a significant effect modifier of the associations of Z c, cfPWV, and PAC with RWT (P ≤ 0.03 for each of the interaction terms). CONCLUSIONS: Greater Z c and cfPWV and lower PAC are independently associated with increased RWT in women but not in men. Our findings suggest that aortic stiffness and greater early, pulsatile hemodynamic load affect left ventricular concentric remodeling in a sex-specific manner.
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 | 0.001 | 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".