MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2290890514 · doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2015-308309

Right ventricular longitudinal strain for risk stratification in low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis with low ejection fraction

2016· article· en· W2290890514 on OpenAlexafffund
Abdellaziz Dahou, Marie‐Annick Clavel, Romain Capoulade, Philipp E. Bartko, Julien Magné, Gerald Mundigler, Jutta Bergler‐Klein, Ian G. Burwash, Julia Mascherbauer, Henrique Barbosa Ribeiro, Kim O’Connor, Helmut Baumgartner, Mario Sénéchal, Jean G. Dumesnil, Raphaël Rosenhek, Patrick Mathieu, Éric Larose, Josep Rodés‐Cabau, Philippe Pîbarot

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec, Université Laval
KeywordsEjection fractionMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineStenosisAortic valve stenosisAortic valve replacementAortic valveHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVLS) is a powerful predictor of outcome in patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis (LF-LG AS) and low LV ejection fraction (LVEF). However, the impact of right ventricular (RV) function on the outcome of these patients remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of RV function as evaluated by RV free wall longitudinal strain (RVLS) on mortality in patients with LF-LG AS and low LVEF. METHODS: 211 patients with LF-LG AS (mean gradient < 40 mm Hg and indexed aortic valve area (AVA) ≤ 0.6 cm²/m²) and low LVEF (≤ 40%)) were prospectively recruited in the True or Pseudo-severe Aortic Stenosis study. AS severity was assessed using the projected AVA (AVAproj) at normal flow rate. Among the 211 patients, 128 had RVLS measurement available at rest and were included in this analysis. RVLS measurement at dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) was available in 58 of the 128 patients. RESULTS: Two-year survival was lower in patients with RVLS < |13|% (53% ± 9%) compared with those with RVLS > |13|% (69% ± 5%) (p = 0.04). In multivariable Cox analysis stratified for the type of treatment (aortic valve replacement vs conservative) and adjusted for age, AS severity, previous myocardial infarction and LVLS, rest RVLS < |13|% (HR = 2.70; 95% CI 1.19 to 6.11; p = 0.018) was independently associated with all-cause mortality. RVLS had incremental prognostic value over baseline risk factors and LVLS (χ² = 20.13 vs 13.56; p = 0.01). Reduced stress RVLS was also associated with increased risk of mortality (stress RVLS <| 14|%: HR = 2.98; 95% CI 1.30 to 6.52; p = 0.01). In multivariable Cox analysis, stress RVLS < |14|% remained independently associated with mortality (HR = 2.94; 95% CI 1.23 to 7.02; p = 0.015). After further adjustment for rest RVLS, stress RVLS < |14|% remained independently associated with mortality (HR = 3.29; 95% CI 1.17 to 9.25; p = 0.024), whereas rest RVLS was not (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this series of patients with LF-LG AS and low LVEF, reduced RVLS was independently associated with increased risk of mortality. Furthermore, stress RVLS provided incremental prognostic value beyond that obtained from rest RVLS. Thus, RVLS measurement at rest and at DSE may be helpful to enhance risk stratification in this high-risk population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01835028; Results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeartSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207