MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2885138689 · doi:10.1161/circ.133.suppl_1.p040

Abstract P040: Muscle Metaboreflex Regulation of Arterial Blood Pressure in Children with Congenital Heart Defects

2016· article· en· W2885138689 on OpenAlexaff
Corey R. Tomczak, Stephanie Fusnik, Elizabeth Hogeweide, Mark J. Haykowsky, Michael K. Stickland, Shonah Runalls, Ashok Kakadekar, Scott Pharis, Charissa Pockett, Marta Erlandson

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineTetralogy of FallotBlood pressureVentricleHeart diseasePulmonary artery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Metabolically sensitive afferent fibers in skeletal muscle can signal an increase the sympathetic control of arterial blood pressure during exercise. This process, called the muscle metaboreflex, is augmented in adults with cardiovascular disease and contributes to exercise intolerance. The role of the muscle metaboreflex on blood pressure control in children with congenital heart defects (CHD) is not known. Hypothesis: We tested the hypothesis that the mean arterial pressure (MAP) response to the muscle metaboreflex would be augmented in children with CHD compared to healthy controls. Methods: Twenty-six children with CHD (11±2 years; males=14; females=12) and 21 age- and sex-matched controls (11±3 years; males=10; females=11) were studied. CHD diagnoses included Tetralogy of Fallot (n=7), pulmonary or aortic stenosis (n=3), hypoplastic left or right heart syndrome (n=5), Ebstien’s anomaly (n=1), atrial or ventricular septal defect (n=5), transposition of the great arteries (n=2), double inlet left ventricle (n=1), heart transplantation (n=2), tricuspid or pulmonary atresia (n=2), coarctation of the aorta (n=2), and dilated cardiomyopathy (n=1). Testing included a 3 min rest period followed by isometric handgrip exercise at 30% of maximal voluntary contraction for 2 min. Exercise was followed by 3 min of either a free flow control condition or circulatory occlusion to isolate the muscle metaboreflex. Beat-by-beat MAP was recorded using finger plethysmography. Analyses were completed using mixed designs factorial ANOVA with P < 0.05 as the level of significance. Data are mean ± SD. Results: During the free flow control condition, there was no significant difference in resting MAP (75±9 mmHg vs. 78±9 mmHg), exercise MAP (86±14 mmHg vs. 87±12 mmHg), or free flow MAP (72±10 mmHg vs. 78±9 mmHg) between children with CHD vs. controls, respectively ( P > 0.05). MAP significantly increased from rest to exercise and returned to resting levels during the free flow control condition for both groups. For the circulatory occlusion condition, there was no significant difference in resting MAP (73±11 mmHg vs. 74±8 mmHg), exercise MAP (84±15 mmHg vs. 81±11 mmHg), or circulatory occlusion MAP (79±13 mmHg vs. 79±13 mmHg) between children with CHD vs. controls, respectively ( P > 0.05). MAP significantly increased from rest to exercise and MAP remained elevated above resting levels during circulatory occlusion for both children with CHD and controls ( P < 0.001 for all). Conclusions: Post-exercise circulatory occlusion significantly increases MAP in children with CHD and healthy children, with no significant difference in the magnitude of the MAP response between groups. We conclude that children with CHD demonstrate a normal muscle metaboreflex during post-exercise circulatory occlusion.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCongenital Heart Disease Studies→French-language works237,207→