Diffuse Myocardial Fibrosis in Children After Heart Transplantations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether the myocardium undergoes accelerated fibrotic remodeling in children after heart transplantation (HTx). METHODS: In this prospective study, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) studies in 17 patients 1.3 years (median, range 0.03-12.6 years) after HTx (mean age, 9.8 ± 6.2 years; 8 girls) were compared to CMR studies in 9 healthy controls (mean age, 12.4 ± 2.4 years; 4 girls). T1 measurements were performed at a midventricular short axis slice before (ie, native T1 times) and after the application of 0.2 mmol/kg gadopentetate dimeglumine in the interventricular septum, left ventricular (LV) free wall and encompassing the entire LV myocardium. The tissue-blood partition coefficient (TBPC), reflecting the degree of diffuse myocardial fibrosis, was calculated as a function of the ratio of T1 change of myocardium compared to blood. Native T1 times and TBPC were correlated with echocardiographic parameters of diastolic function. RESULTS: Native T1 times were significantly higher in HTx patients compared to controls in all regions assessed (LV free wall 973 ± 42 vs 923 ± 12 ms; P < 0.005; interventricular septum 1003 ± 31 vs 974 ± 21 ms, P < 0.05; entire LV myocardium 987 ± 33 vs 951 ± 16 ms; P < 0.005) and correlated with LV E/e' as an echocardiographic marker of diastolic dysfunction (r = 0.54, P < 0.05). The TBPC was elevated in the LV free wall (0.45 ± 0.06 vs 0.40 ± 0.03, P < 0.005) and the entire LV myocardium (0.47 ± 0.06 vs 0.43 ± 0.03, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of diffuse myocardial fibrosis and is already present in children after HTx. It appears to be associated with diastolic dysfunction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".