MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944199668 · doi:10.1101/631481

Electrocardiographic characterization of non-selective His bundle pacing. Validation of novel diagnostic criteria

2019· preprint· en· W2944199668 on OpenAlexaff
Marek Jastrzębski, Paweł Moskal, Karol Čurila, Kamil Fijorek, Piotr Kukla, Agnieszka Bednarek, Grzegorz Kiełbasa, Adam Bednarski, Adrián Baranchuk, Danuta Czarnecka

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQRS complexMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyBundleAlgorithmMathematicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims Permanent His bundle (HB) pacing is usually accompanied by simultaneous capture of the adjacent right ventricular (RV) myocardium - this is described as a non-selective (ns)-HB pacing. Our aim was to identify ECG criteria for loss of HB capture during ns-HB pacing. Methods Consecutive patients with permanent HB pacing were recruited. Surface 12-lead ECGs during ns-HB pacing and loss of HB capture (RV-only capture) were obtained. ECG criteria for loss/presence of HB capture were identified. In the validation phase these criteria and the “HB ECG algorithm” were tested by two blinded observers using a separate, sizable set of ECGs. Results A total of 353 ECG (226 ns-HB and 128 RV-only) were obtained from 226 patients with permanent HB pacing devices. QRS notch/slur in left ventricular leads and R-wave peak time in lead V6 were identified as the best features for differentiation. The 2-step HB ECG algorithm based on these features correctly classified 87.1% of cases with sensitivity and specificity of 93.2% and 83.9%, respectively. Moreover, the proposed criteria for definitive diagnosis of ns-HB capture (no QRS slur/notch in leads I, V1, V4-V6 and the R-wave peak time in V6 ≤ 100 ms) presented 100% specificity. Conclusion A novel ECG algorithm for the diagnosis of loss of HB capture and novel criteria for definitive confirmation of HB capture were formulated and validated. Practical application of these criteria during implant and follow-up of patients with HB pacing devices is feasible. Condensed Abstract The 2-step ECG algorithm for loss of His bundle capture based on surface ECG analysis is proposed and validated. This method correctly classified 87.1% of cases with a sensitivity and specificity of 93.2% and 83.9%, respectively. What’s New This is the first study that analyzes QRS characteristics during non-selective His bundle pacing in a sizable cohort of patients. Precise criteria and a novel algorithm for electrocardiographic diagnosis of loss of HB capture during presumed non-selective HB pacing were validated. QRS notch/slur in left ventricular leads was identified as a simple and reproducible feature indicating loss of HB capture or lack/loss of correction of intraventricular conduction disturbances. Assessment of R-wave peak time in lead V6 rather than QRS duration for diagnosis of ns-HB pacing was validated.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesFrench-language works237,207