MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2914110403 · doi:10.1161/str.50.suppl_1.wp270

Abstract WP270: Can Left Atrial Volume Index Be Used to Identify Patients With Asymptomatic Atrial Fibrillation After Acute Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack?

2019· article· en· W2914110403 on OpenAlexaff
Quang Vu, Benjamin Lisle, Tamara T Barghouthi, Amy Guzik, Laura Bishop, Nada N El Husseini, Charles H. Tegeler, Patrick Reynolds, Cheryl Bushnell

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationCardiologyInternal medicineAsymptomaticStroke (engine)Premature atrial contraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Detecting atrial fibrillation (AF) after an ischemic stroke may be challenging. We aimed to determine whether using the left atrial volume index (LAVi) can help screen patients at risk of having AF after an ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Methods: All adult patients who were admitted to our comprehensive stroke center with ischemic strokes or TIA from January 2017 to January 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Demographics, risk factors, stroke etiology and transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) data were collected. AF detection was based on either in-hospital cardiac telemetry and/or a 14-day or 30-day ambulatory ECG monitoring. Reference values for LAVi were derived from 2015 Guidelines from the American Society of Echocardiography. TTE and ECG parameters were analyzed using Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables and non-parametric tests for continuous variables. Results: We identified 334 patients with ischemic strokes and TIA without documented AF (66 ± 11 years, 49% females, 70% White, 23% African American, 6% Other). The mean total days of cardiac monitoring was 9.8 ± 7.2 days and it was lower in patients with AF vs without AF (3.8 ± 5.0 days vs. 10.6 ± 7.1 days, p < 0.0001). Newly diagnosed AF was detected in 37 of 334 patients (11%). Of the 241 patients with normal left atrium (LA), 15 (6%) were diagnosed with AF; 10 of 49 (20%) with mildly dilated LA; 5 of 23 (22%) with moderately dilated LA; 7 of 21 (33%) with severely dilated LA. The proportions of AF detection differed significantly between the LA categories ( p < 0.0001). The mean LAVi was higher in patients with AF vs without AF (40.0 ± 13.8 mL/m 2 vs. 28 ± 10.5 mL/m 2 , p < 0.001), and in those with cardioembolic strokes (34.7 ± 13.3 mL/m 2 , p < 0.0001). The mean LAVi for non-cardioembolic strokes including cryptogenic, small vessel and large vessel were 29.3 ± 10.2 mL/m 2 , 28.6 ± 8.5 mL/m 2 , 26.2 ± 12.8 mL/m 2 , respectively. Conclusion: Our data demonstrates a significant association between higher LAVi on routine TTE and detecting AF using non-invasive ECG monitoring in patients with ischemic strokes or TIA. Use of LAVi measured during the stroke hospitalization may help identify patients who would benefit from additional non-invasive cardiac monitoring post-discharge.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→