Correlation of electrocardiogram parameters and hemodynamic outcomes in patients with isolated secundum atrial septal defects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The characteristic rSR’ pattern in lead V1 on electrocardiogram (ECG) has been described in association with atrial septal defect (ASD) and right ventricular dilation. We aimed to determine if temporal ECG changes can guide a more discriminate and cost-effective screening during follow-up of isolated secundum ASD. Methods: Our study population included all pediatric patients followed at the Stollery Children's Hospital with a secundum ASD, not associated with other significant heart disease, between 2004 and 2010. We collected clinical as well as serial echocardiographic and ECG data. Results: We identified 141 patients with ASD, 95% were asymptomatic and 88% referred for a murmur. Moderate-to-large (>5 mm) ASDs were present in 52%. The prevalence of an rSR’ pattern was 26% in the overall cohort and 54% in the large ASD group. During median follow-up of 28.7 months, 37 patients underwent surgical or transcatheter closure. Among patients with rSR’ on ECG, 78% had moderate-to-large ASD size. In that group, the presence versus the absence of rSR’ correlated with lower positive predictive value (PPV) for spontaneous closure (7% vs. 36%; P = 0.01) and higher PPV for device or surgical closure (71% vs. 38%; P = 0.02). Conclusion: We observed a lower prevalence of rSR’ pattern in patients with isolated ASD than previously reported. However, an rSR’ pattern had incremental value in predicting the need for surgical or device intervention for closure in moderate-large groups. This can be used to tailor patient echocardiographic screening and caregiver counseling.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".