Magnetic resonance imaging of the transplanted pediatric heart as a potential predictor of rejection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) as a non-invasive tool to detect acute cellular rejection (ACR) in children after heart transplant (HT). METHODS: Thirty pediatric HT recipients underwent CMR at the time of surveillance endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) and results were compared to 14 non-transplant controls. Biventricular volumes, ejection fractions (EFs), T2-weighted signal intensities, native T1 times, extracellular volumes (ECVs) and presence of late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) were compared between patients and controls and between patients with International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) grade ≥ 2R rejection and those with grade 0/1R. Heart rate (HR) and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) were assessed as potential biomarkers. RESULTS: Significant ACR (ISHLT grade ≥ 2R) was an infrequent event in our population (5/30, 17%). Ventricular volumes, EFs, LGE prevalence, ECVs, native T1 times, T2 signal intensity ratios, HR and BNP were not associated with the presence of ≥ 2R ACR. CONCLUSION: In this pilot study CMR did not reliably identify ACR-related changes in pediatric HT 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 | 0.001 | 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".