MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2341968681 · doi:10.1056/nejm200006293422602

Electrophysiologic Testing to Identify Patients with Coronary Artery Disease Who Are at Risk for Sudden Death

2000· article· en· W2341968681 on OpenAlexaff
Alfred E. Buxton, Kerry L. Lee, Lorenzo A. DiCarlo, Michael R. Gold, G. Stephen Greer, Eric N. Prystowsky, Michael F. O’Toole, Anthony Tang, John D. Fisher, James Coromilas, Mario Talajic, Gail E. Hafley

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstituteUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseVentricular tachycardiaAsymptomaticEjection fractionSudden cardiac deathSudden deathHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The mortality rate among patients with coronary artery disease, abnormal ventricular function, and unsustained ventricular tachycardia is high. The usefulness of electrophysiologic testing for risk stratification in these patients is unclear. METHODS: We performed electrophysiologic testing in patients who had coronary artery disease, a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40 percent or less, and asymptomatic, unsustained ventricular tachycardia. Patients in whom sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias could be induced were randomly assigned to receive either antiarrhythmic therapy guided by electrophysiologic testing or no antiarrhythmic therapy. The primary end point was cardiac arrest or death from arrhythmia. Patients without inducible tachyarrhythmias were followed in a registry. We compared the outcomes of 1397 patients in the registry with those of 353 patients with inducible tachyarrhythmias who were randomly assigned to receive no antiarrhythmic therapy in order to assess the prognostic value of electrophysiologic testing. RESULTS: Patients were followed for a median of 39 months. In a Kaplan-Meier analysis, two-year and five-year rates of cardiac arrest or death due to arrhythmia were 12 and 24 percent, respectively, among the patients in the registry, as compared with 18 and 32 percent among the patients with inducible tachyarrhythmias who were assigned to no antiarrhythmic therapy (adjusted P<0.001). Overall mortality after five years was 48 percent among the patients with inducible tachyarrhythmias, as compared with 44 percent among the patients in the registry (adjusted P=0.005). Deaths among patients without inducible tachyarrhythmias were less likely to be classified as due to arrhythmia than those among patients with inducible tachyarrhythmias (45 and 54 percent, respectively; P=0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with coronary artery disease, left ventricular dysfunction, and asymptomatic, unsustained ventricular tachycardia in whom sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias cannot be induced have a significantly lower risk of sudden death or cardiac arrest and lower overall mortality than similar patients with inducible sustained tachyarrhythmias.

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)0.004
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations564
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207