Left ventricular mechanics in late second trimester of healthy pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate left ventricular (LV) mechanics in the second trimester of healthy pregnancy and to determine the influence of underpinning hemodynamics (heart rate (HR), preload and afterload) on LV mechanics during gestation. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 18 non-pregnant, 14 nulliparous pregnant (22-26 weeks' gestation) and 13 primiparous postpartum (12-16 weeks after delivery) women. All pregnant and postpartum women had uncomplicated, singleton gestations. Cardiac structure and function were assessed using echocardiography. LV mechanics, specifically longitudinal strain, circumferential strain and twist/untwist, were measured using speckle-tracking echocardiography. Differences between groups were identified using ANCOVA, with age, HR, end-diastolic volume (EDV) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) as covariates. Relationships between LV mechanics and hemodynamics were examined using Pearson's correlation. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in LV structure and traditional measurements of systolic and diastolic function between the three groups. Pregnant women, compared with non-pregnant ones, had significantly higher resting longitudinal strain (-22 ± 2% vs -17 ± 3%; P = 0.002) and basal circumferential strain (-23 ± 4% vs -16 ± 2%; P = 0.001). Apical circumferential strain and LV twist and untwist mechanics were similar between the three groups. No statistically significant relationships were observed between LV mechanics and HR, EDV or SBP within the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the non-pregnant state, pregnant women in the second trimester of a healthy pregnancy have significantly greater resting systolic function, as assessed by LV longitudinal and circumferential strain. Contrary to previous work, these data show that healthy pregnant women should not exhibit reductions in resting systolic function between 22 and 26 weeks' gestation. The enhanced myocardial contractile function during gestation does not appear to be related to hemodynamic load and could be the result of other physiological adaptations to pregnancy. Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".