P3549Clinical significance of impaired cardiac conduction after alcohol septal ablation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Impairment of cardiac conduction and need for pacemaker (PM) after alcohol septal ablation (ASA) in patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) has been of major concern. Methods: We analysed the impact of bundle branch block (BBB) and PM after ASA on symptoms and survival in 1416 HCM patients. Results: Before ASA 58 (4%) patients had a PM and 64 (5%) patients had an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). At latest follow-up (5.0±4.0 years) after ASA, 118 (8%) patients had an ICD and 229 (16%) patients had a PM. In patients without implantable device before ASA 13% had a PM and 5% had an ICD implanted following ASA. New onset BBB was present in 44% (right BBB in 31%) of patients without previous BBB. At latest follow-up, we found no associations between BBB and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class 3–4 (OR 0.98, CI 0.63 - 1.51, p=0.91) (see Table) or Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class 3–4 (OR 1.5, CI 0.32–6.7, p=0.62), respectively, and no associations between PM and NYHA class 3–4 (OR 1.2, CI 0.70–2.0, p=0.52) or CCS 3–4 (OR 1.3, CI 0.24–6.6, p=0.79), respectively. The survival after ASA was not reduced in patients with BBB (HR 0.73, CI 0.53–1.01, p=0.06) or PM (HR 0.78, CI 0.52–1.17, p=0.24) (see Figure 1A and B).
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".