Relative Impact of Right Ventricular Electromechanical Dyssynchrony Versus Pulmonary Regurgitation on Right Ventricular Dysfunction and Exercise Intolerance in Patients After Repair of Tetralogy of Fallot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The relative impact of right ventricular ( RV ) electromechanical dyssynchrony versus pulmonary regurgitation ( PR ) on exercise capacity and RV function after tetralogy of Fallot repair is unknown. We aimed to delineate the relative effects of these factors on RV function and exercise capacity. Methods and Results We retrospectively analyzed 81 children with tetralogy of Fallot repair using multivariable regression. Predictor parameters were electrocardiographic QRS duration reflecting electromechanical dyssynchrony and PR severity by cardiac magnetic resonance. The outcome parameters were exercise capacity (percentage predicted peak oxygen consumption) and cardiac magnetic resonance ejection fraction (RV ejection fraction). To understand the relative effects of RV dyssynchrony versus PR on exercise capacity and RV function, virtual patient simulations were performed using a closed-loop cardiovascular system model (CircAdapt), covering a wide spectrum of disease severity. Eighty-one patients with tetralogy of Fallot repair (median [interquartile range { IQR} ] age, 14.48 [11.55-15.91] years) were analyzed. All had prolonged QRS duration (median [IQR], 144 [123-152] ms), at least moderate PR (median [IQR], 40% [29%-48%]), reduced exercise capacity (median [IQR], 79% [68%-92%] predicted peak oxygen consumption), and reduced RV ejection fraction (median [IQR], 48% [44%-52%]). Longer QRS duration, more than PR , was associated with lower oxygen consumption and lower RV ejection fraction. In a multivariable regression analysis, oxygen consumption decreased with both increasing QRS duration and PR severity. CircAdapt modeling showed that RV dyssynchrony exerts a stronger limiting effect on exercise capacity and on RV ejection fraction than does PR , regardless of contractile function. Conclusions In both patient data and computer simulations, RV dyssynchrony, more than PR , appears to be associated with reduced exercise capacity and RV systolic dysfunction in patients after TOF repair.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".