Abstract 13554: Left Atrial Function in Children by Volume and Strain Analysis: Impact of Congenital Aortic Stenosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Left atrial (LA) function by volume and strain analysis in children has been little studied. LA dysfunction related to aortic stenosis has been reported in adults. Hypotheses: 1. LA volume and strain analysis is feasible and reproducible in normal children. 2. Children with isolated congenital aortic stenosis (AS) as compared to matched controls have higher maximal LA volume (LAV) and lower total longitudinal LA strain. Methods: Retrospective chart review and offline analysis of 2D echocardiogram images for phasic LAVs, volume indices, and longitudinal LA strain (Fig 1) by speckle tracking (TomTec software) in: 1. Healthy children with a normal echocardiogram; and, 2. Children ≥1 years of age with significant (≥ moderate) isolated AS. AS cases were compared with age, gender and BSA-matched normal controls. Results: There were 67 normal subjects [age: 10.5 (1.3-22.1) yrs; 50 males, 17 females; BSA 1.22 (0.44-2.39) m2] studied. No significant inter-observer and intra-observer differences were noted in normal subjects (Fig 2). Between June 2004 and October 2012, there were 41 eligible AS cases [Age: 11.7 (1.6-26.8) yrs; 32 males, 9 females] with median maximal Doppler aortic stenosis gradient of 63 (43-94) mm Hg. Significantly higher phasic indexed LAVs and indexed active LA stroke volume (pump function) and lower strain values for LA reservoir and conduit function were noted in AS cases (Fig 2). Conclusions: LA volume and strain analysis is reproducible and feasible in children. Children with significant AS have abnormal LA function with higher phasic LA volumes, higher LA pump function, and lower strain-derived reservoir and conduit LA function.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".