Neurohormone levels remain elevated in continuous flow left ventricular assist device recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The levels of neurohormones were assessed in continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) recipients and compared to patients with heart failure (HF) and to healthy controls (HCs), and CF-LVAD recipients with closed or open aortic valves (AVs). METHODS: Aldosterone, norepinephrine, and renin levels were assessed in a total of 46 participants, including CF-LVAD recipients (n = 18), HF patients (n = 14), and HC individuals (n = 14). Echocardiographic assessments were performed to evaluate cardiac functions and aortic valve status and neurohormone levels were compared between CF-LVAD recipients with closed or open AVs. RESULTS: Aldosterone, norepinephrine, and renin levels were elevated to a similar extent in CF-LVAD recipients and HF patients, compared to HC individuals. In the CF-LVAD group, no differences were found between the levels of norepinephrine and aldosterone between recipients with AV opened or closed. With an open AVs, CF-LVAD recipients had higher levels of renin compared to recipients with closed AVs. However, an open AV was only a weak predictor of higher levels of renin. CONCLUSION: The findings that aldosterone, norepinephrine, and renin were elevated after restoration of hemodynamic functions during LVAD support suggest that the levels of neurohormones did not normalize. Future studies should investigate whether AV status in CF-LVAD recipients affects the levels of RAAS neurohormones and the mechanisms and clinical implications of elevated levels of neurohormones in CF-LVAD 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".