Excitable gap composition in the presence of antiarrhythmic drugs in common human atrial flutter.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Recurrence of atrial flutter (AFl) on antiarrhythmic drugs is frequently observed. To determine the reasons for drug inefficacy, the electrophysiological parameters of AFl were studied in eight patients without drug, six patients on sotalol (Sot), eight patients on amiodarone (Amio) and four patients on propafenone (PPF) who presented to the electrophysiology laboratory for conversion of AFl by rapid atrial pacing. METHODS: A quadripolar electrode catheter was positioned in the right atrium in the pathway of the AFl circuit. The duration and composition of the excitable gap (EG) were determined by premature stimuli during AFl. RESULTS: The EG in AFl recurring on Sot (80 +/- 25 ms), Amio (78 +/- 13 ms) and PPF (83 +/- 26 ms) was not significantly different from that without drug (88 +/- 14 ms). Furthermore, a fully excitable portion of the EG was present whether with or without drug. CONCLUSIONS: AFl recurrence on Amio, PPF or Sot is associated with the continued presence of an EG and fully excitable portion. These findings explain the persistent viability of the AFl circuit despite drug therapy in these patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".