MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971870581 · doi:10.1097/hcr.0000000000000446

Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing Following Open Repair for a Proximal Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm or Dissection

2019· article· en· W2971870581 on OpenAlexaff
Whitney Hornsby, Elizabeth L. Norton, Samantha Fink, Sara Saberi, Xiaoting Wu, Cheri L. McGowan, Robert D. Brook, Lee W. Jones, Cristen J. Willer, Himanshu J. Patel, Kim A. Eagle, Carl J. Lavie, Melvyn Rubenfire, Bo Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineThoracic aortic aneurysmAortic aneurysmAneurysmDissection (medical)Aortic dissectionCardiologySurgeryInternal medicineAorta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: There are limited data on cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPX) and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), following open repair for a proximal thoracic aortic aneurysm or dissection. The aim was to evaluate serious adverse events, abnormal CPX event rate, CRF (peak oxygen uptake, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak), and blood pressure. METHODS: Patients were retrospectively identified from cardiac rehabilitation participation or prospectively enrolled in a research study and grouped by phenotype: (1) bicuspid aortic valve/thoracic aortic aneurysm, (2) tricuspid aortic valve/thoracic aortic aneurysm, and (3) acute type A aortic dissection. RESULTS: Patients (n = 128) completed a CPX a median of 2.9 mo (interquartile range: 1.8, 3.5) following repair. No serious adverse events were reported, although 3 abnormal exercise tests (2% event rate) were observed. Eighty-one percent of CPX studies were considered peak effort (defined as respiratory exchange ratio of ≥1.05). Median measured (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak was <36% predicted normative values (19.2 mL·kgmin vs 29.3 mLkgmin, P < .0001); the most marked impairment in (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak was observed in the acute type A aortic dissection group (<40% normative values), which was significantly different from other groups (P < .05). Peak exercise systolic and diastolic blood pressures were 160 mm Hg (144, 172) and 70 mm Hg (62, 80), with no differences noted between groups. CONCLUSIONS: We observed no serious adverse events with an abnormal CPX event rate of only 2% 3 mo following repair for a proximal thoracic aortic aneurysm or dissection. (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak was reduced among all patient groups, especially the acute type A aortic dissection group, which may be clinically significant, given the well-established prognostic importance of reduced cardiorespiratory fitness.

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)0.002
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations35
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and PreventionSame topicAortic Disease and Treatment ApproachesFrench-language works237,207