A CMR study of left atrial mechanics in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: left atrial function predicts paroxysmal atrial fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Atrial fibrillation is a frequent complication in HCM, often precipitating heart failure or stroke. Identification of patients at risk of developing AF may have implications for management. While left atrial (LA) volumes have been shown to increase the risk of AF, we hypothesized that LA function is an important predictor of risk. Methods: 72 patients (36 without AF-HCM SR); 36 with PAF-HCM PAF) were compared. PAF and SR patients were matched on an individual basis for age, gender, and HCM morphology. Strain analysis with Velocity Vector Imaging software was performed on cine SSFP images obtained from CMR to assess LA volumes and function. All patients were in sinus rhythm at the time of CMR. Results: see Table. Conclusions: In HCM patients with PAF, LA function is impaired even in the presence of sinus rhythm. This difference is present even in patients with similar degrees of hypertrophy, LVOT obstruction, and mitral regurgitation, suggesting the likelihood of an underlying atrial myopathy. The presence of LA dysfunction in patients with HCM provides an incremental measure of risk of PAF over and above LA volume.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".