Clinical Significance of Arterial Velocity Pulse Index in Patients With Stage B Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In clinical settings, the arterial velocity pulse index (AVI) is explored as a novel marker of atherosclerosis using pulse wave analysis; however, data regarding the correlations between AVI and heart failure (HF) are limited. This study aimed to elucidate the clinical significance of AVI in patients with stage B HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 345 patients with stage B HFpEF (no symptoms despite evidence of cardiac structural or functional impairment, and left ventricular ejection fraction which is estimated by echocardiography ≥ 50%) were enrolled. Patients with a history of HF hospitalization were excluded. The AVI was measured using a commercial device, and associations between AVI and various clinical parameters were examined. RESULTS: Significant correlations between AVI and various clinical parameters, such as E/e' as a maker of left ventricular diastolic function (r = 0.35; P < 0.001), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T levels as a marker of myocardial injury (r = 0.47; P < 0.001), reactive oxygen metabolite levels as an oxidative stress marker (r = 0.31; P < 0.001), urinary albumin concentration as a marker of kidney function (r = 0.34; P < 0.001) and calf circumference as a marker of muscle mass volume (r = -0.42; P < 0.001) were observed. Furthermore, multiple regression analyses revealed that these clinical parameters were selected as independent variables when AVI was used as a subordinate factor. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that AVI might be a determining factor for prognosis in patients with stage B HFpEF. Nevertheless, further comprehensive prospective studies, including intervention therapies, are warranted to validate the findings of this study.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".