MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527423209 · doi:10.14740/jocmr2680w

Prognostic Importance of Exercise Brain Natriuretic Peptide in Asymptomatic Chronic Organic Severe Mitral Regurgitation: An Observational Study

2016· article· en· W2527423209 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Santosh Kumar Sinha, Shalini Garg, Ramesh Thakur, Vinay Krishna, Karandeep Singh, Mohit Sachan, Amit Goel, Mahamdula Razi, Umeshwar Pandey, C. M. Varma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsymptomaticMitral regurgitationBrain natriuretic peptideObservational studyCardiologyInternal medicineNatriuretic peptideHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The optimal timing of surgery in patients with chronic organic severe mitral regurgitation (MR) continues to be debated, especially for those who are asymptomatic. The aim of the study was to determine independent and additive prognostic value of exercise brain natriuretic peptide (eBNP) in patients with severe asymptomatic MR and normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Methods: Two hundred twenty-three consecutive patients with severe MR defined by effective regurgitant orifice (ERO) area ? 40 mm 2 and/or residual volume >= 60 mL, LVEF > 60%, and normal LV end-systolic diameter < 40 mm underwent symptom limited exercise treadmill test (TMT). Echocardiography was done immediately after exercise. Data were obtained within 3 minutes of peak exercise. BNP levels were assessed before echo (after 30 minutes of supine rest) and at exercise (i.e., within the 3 minutes of the end of effort). Patients were followed up every 3 months up to 15 months for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) (cardiovascular death, need for mitral valve surgery and hospitalization for acute pulmonary edema or heart failure). Results: Mean age was 31.2 ± 9 years (range: 18 - 40) with majority being male (n = 153; 68%). Etiologies were rheumatic (n = 201; 90%), mitral valve prolapse (n = 17; 7.6%) and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n = 5; 2.4%). BNP level significantly increased from rest (65.24 ± 43.92 pg/mL; median: 43.5 pg/mL) to exercise (100.24 ± 98.24 pg/mL; median: 66.5 pg/mL; P < 0.001). Patients were divided into three tertiles according to eBNP levels (T 1 = 15 - 44; T 2 = 45 - 104; T 3 = 105 - 400). There was trend for significantly lower exercise time in T 3 . During TMT, 66 (29.5%) stopped exercise due to dyspnea. They had similar resting BNP level compared with others but had significantly higher eBNP level (136 ± 109.7 pg/mL vs. 84.88 ± 90.2 pg/mL; P < 0.001). During follow-up (15 months), MACE occurred in 83 patients (37.2%): mitral valve replacement (MVR) in 59 patients (symptomatic: 43; LV dilatation or dysfunction: 9; both symptoms and dilatation/dysfunction: 7), 17 hospitalizations for congestive heart failure, five patients developing acute pulmonary edema and atrial fibrillation in remaining two patients. This was 7.6%, 35% and 69% in T 1 , T 2 and T 3 , respectively and had significantly higher eBNP level than without any event (165 ± 119 pg/mL vs. 57 ± 48 pg/mL; P < 0.001). Using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the best cut-off value of eBNP level to predict cardiac events was 90 pg/mL (sensitivity: 75%; specificity: 88.6%; positive predictive value: 79%; negative predictive value: 83.9%). Conclusion: In asymptomatic patients, eBNP level provides incremental prognostic value beyond echocardiographic data and those with elevated eBNP should be considered at high risk for reduced event-free survival and might be considered for early MVR. J Clin Med Res. 2016;8(11):797-804 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jocmr2680w

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.257
GPT teacher head0.567
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207