MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

31 Unravelling the Mechanisms of Mental Stress Induced Myocardial Ischaemia

2016· article· en· W2416414558 on OpenAlexaff
Satpal Arri, Rupert Williams, Mathew Lumley, Howard Ellis, Kaleab Asrress, Tiffany Patterson, Richard A. Cooke, Divaka Perera, James Coutts, Brian Clapp, Michael Marber, Simon Redwood

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart View · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseBlood pressureAnginaHeart rateIschemiaMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Mental stress triggers myocardial ischaemia at cardiac workloads that are lower than those that cause exercise-induced ischaemia in the same patient. Clinical relevance is highlighted by observational studies demonstrating marked increases in cardiovascular events when large populations are exposed to acute mental stress for example by earthquakes and publicised national sports events. In contrast, even in patients with known coronary artery disease and exertional angina, exercise is safe and beneficial. These differences may reflect underlying pathophysiology with vascular dysregulation limiting myocardial blood flow during mental stress. Methods Simultaneous intracoronary pressure and flow velocity data were acquired in a target artery from 15 patients with significant coronary artery disease (FFR >0.8 and or stenosis >70%) and 11 controls following exposure to mental stress during cardiac catheterisation. Oral nitrate preparations, calcium channel antagonists and beta-blockers were stopped 24–48 h in advance. All data were acquired at rest and at peak mental stress. Mental stress involved a 6-minute mental stress test consisting of mental arithmetic and the Stroop test. Coronary flow average peak velocity (APV), microvascular resistance (MVR) and buckberg index (BI; a surrogate of subendocardial ischaemia) were calculated. Wave intensity analysis also differentiated waves that accelerate and decelerate coronary flow Results Mental stress was associated with an increase in systolic blood pressure (SBP, 28.43 mmHg; p = 0<0001), diastolic blood pressure (DBP, 14.47 mmHg; p = 0<0001), and heart rate (HR, 13.63 bpm; p = 0<0001). Rate pressure product (RPP) a marker of myocardial oxygen demand increased by 4429 (p = 0<0001). In patients with coronary disease this increase in demand was not met by an increase in coronary flow but instead by a paradoxical increase in microvascular resistance (206.1; p = 0.0096), resulting in subendocardial ischaemia as reflected by a fall in the BI (-0.23 (p < 0.0001). In contrast, an increase in coronary flow was observed in response to mental stress in the control group (5.25; p = 0.003). This increase in coronary flow was a result of an increase in the backward expansion wave and forward compression wave reflecting an increase in sympathetic activity and myocardial contractility. Conclusions Exposure to mental stress is associated with an increase in myocardial work and oxygen demand that is met by an increase in coronary flow in patients with unobstructed coronaries. Paradoxical microvascular dysfunction in response to mental stress does occur and this abnormal endothelial response appears to correlate with the extent of atherosclerosis in the vessel. This likely plays a key role in the mechanism of mental stress induced myocardial ischaemia and provides an exciting target for future therapies.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeart View→Same topicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→