MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320572218 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000001655

Resolution of Cardiogenic Shock Using Echocardiography-Guided Pacing Optimization in Intensive Care: A Case Series*

2016· article· en· W2320572218 on OpenAlexaff
Guido Tavazzi, Andy Kontogeorgis, Niels Bergsland, Susanna Price

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiogenic shockCardiologyInternal medicineCardiac outputEjection fractionIntensive careCardiac indexShock (circulatory)Cardiac function curveHeart failureAnesthesiaHemodynamicsMyocardial infarctionIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Inotropic and vasopressor drugs are routinely used in critically ill patients to maintain adequate blood pressure and cardiac output in patients with cardiogenic shock although potentially at the expense of increasing myocardial oxygen demand. Pacing optimization has been demonstrated as effective in reducing catecholamine requirements in patients with chronic heart failure by improving cardiac efficiency; however, there are no reports relating to the effectiveness of pacemaker optimization on cardiac output in critically ill patients with cardiogenic shock in the intensive care. DATA SOURCES: Retrospective data analysis. STUDY SELECTION: Twenty-bed adult tertiary cardiothoracic ICU, university hospital. DATA EXTRACTION: Eight sequential patients receiving dual chamber pacemaker with DDD modality with cardiogenic shock and hemodynamic instability refractory to catecholamines underwent echocardiography-guided pacemaker optimization of cardiac output. An iterative method with Doppler echocardiography was used to assess changes in cardiac output, left ventricular filling time, ejection time, total isovolumic time, mitral regurgitation, ejection fraction, and blood pressure at different increments of heart rate, and atrioventricular and interventricular delay. All results are shown as median (minimum/maximum level) or mean ± SD. DATA SYNTHESIS: Using echocardiography-guided pacemaker optimization on cardiac output, the cardiac output increased from 3.2 (2.3/3.8) to 5.7 L/min (4.85/7.1) and cardiac index from 1.64 (1.1/1.9) to 2.68 L/min/m (2.1/3.2) and the total isovolumic time reduced from 22.8 to normal values (<14). In association, the glomerular filtration rate increased significantly except in one patient with stage IV chronic kidney disease. All inotropes and vasopressors were discontinued within 12 hours of pacemaker optimization on cardiac output, and all patients were discharged from the ICU within 1 week. CONCLUSIONS: Echocardiography-guided pacemaker optimization of cardiac output is a feasible bedside therapeutic option, which should be considered when standard medical treatments are insufficient for the treatment of cardiogenic shock refractory to inotropic support, thereby minimizing the detrimental effect of catecholamines.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesFrench-language works237,207