Serial Assessment of Spot Urine Sodium Predicts Effectiveness of Decongestion and Outcome in Patients with Acute Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims The clinical significance of the measurement of urine sodium concentration (UNa+) in response to loop diuretic administration in patients with acute heart failure (AHF) is still unsettled. We studied the association of serial measurements of spot UNa+ during the first 48 h of AHF treatment with the indices of decongestion, renal function, and prognosis. Methods and results We enrolled 111 AHF patients, all of whom received intravenous furosemide on admission. The mean spot UNa+ significantly increased in the 6 h sample (P < 0.05 vs. baseline) and returned to baseline values in the 24 and 48 h samples. Based on the increase or decrease/no change of UNa+ in the 6 and 48 h samples vs. baseline, patients were divided into two groups at each time point, respectively. Patients did not differ in baseline clinical and laboratory characteristics. Patients with a decrease/no change of UNa+ in the 6 and 48 h samples had a lower weight loss during hospitalization. Patients with a decrease/no change of UNa+ in the 48 h sample had a poorer diuretic response and a significant increase in the urinary levels of the tubular biomarkers: kidney injury molecule-1 and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin. Low UNa+ and decrease/no change in UNa+ in the 6 and 48 h samples were independent predictors of higher risk of all-cause mortality during 1-year follow-up (all P < 0.05). Conclusion In AHF, low spot UNa+ and lack to increase UNa+ in response to intravenous diuretics are associated with poor diuretic response, markers of tubular injury and high risk of 1-year mortality.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".