MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2590386778 · doi:10.1093/europace/euw294

Extensive atrial fibrosis assessed by late gadolinium enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance associated with advanced interatrial block electrocardiogram pattern

2017· article· en· W2590386778 on OpenAlexaff
Eva Benito, Antonio Bayés de Luna, Adrián Baranchuk, Lluı́s Mont

Bibliographic record

VenueEP Europace · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineGadoliniumCardiac magnetic resonanceMagnetic resonance imagingFibrosisRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electrocardiogram (ECG)-based criteria of partial and advanced interatrial block (P-IAB, P ≥ 120 ms; A-IAB, P ≥ 120 ms plus biphasic (±) morphology in the inferior leads) and their association with atrial fibrillation/flutter were described by Bayés de Luna et al. in the 1980s. We present the case of an 82-year-old man. Over the years, his ECG pattern has developed from normal P wave to P-IAB and later A-IAB (Panel A) and presents short AF runs during Holter monitoring. Panel A shows that the clear A-IAB pattern with a very low voltage identifies a clear P wave with the biphasic (±) morphology. We obtained a 3D reconstruction of 3T late gadolinium enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance (LGE-CMR) (Panel B) showing extensive biatrial fibrosis with clear involvement of the upper part of the septum (Bachmann's bundle; arrows). The image intensity ratio between CMR local signal intensity of LGE and mean signal intensity of blood pool depicts the degree of fibrosis in a colour scale (dense fibrosis in red). The image describes the association between A-IAB and atrial fibrosis in both atria detected by LGE-CMR, explaining the abnormal atrial activation. Overall, this sequence demonstrates non-invasively that atrial fibrosis is a key factor in explaining the ECG pattern of A-IAB. The full-length version of this report can be viewed at: http://www.escardio.org/Guidelines-&-Education/E-learning/Clinical-cases/Electrophysiology/EP-Case-Reports.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations40
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEP EuropaceSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207