Prognostic implications of left ventricular global longitudinal strain in patients with bicuspid aortic valve disease and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: In patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF), the frequency of impaired LV global longitudinal strain (GLS) and its prognostic implications are unknown. The present study evaluated the proportion and prognostic value of impaired LV GLS in patients with BAV and preserved LVEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Five hundred and thirteen patients (68% men; mean age 44 ± 18 years) with BAV and preserved LVEF (>50%) were divided into five groups according to the type of BAV dysfunction: (i) normal function BAV, (ii) mild aortic stenosis (AS) or aortic regurgitation (AR), (iii) ≥moderate isolated AS, (iv) ≥moderate isolated AR, and (v) ≥moderate mixed AS and AR. LV systolic dysfunction based on 2D speckle-tracking echocardiography was defined as a cut-off value of LVGLS (-13.6%). The primary outcome was aortic valve intervention or all-cause mortality. The proportion of patients with LVGLS ≤-13.6% was the highest in the normal BAV group (97%) and the lowest in the group with moderate and severe mixed AS and AR (79%). During a median follow-up of 10 years, 210 (41%) patients underwent aortic valve replacement and 17 (3%) died. Patients with preserved LV systolic function (LVGLS ≤ -13.6%) had significantly better event-free survival compared to those with impaired LV systolic function (LVGLS > -13.6%). LVGLS was independently associated with increased risk of events (mainly aortic valve replacement): hazard ratio 1.09; P < 0.001. CONCLUSION: Impaired LVGLS in BAV with preserved LVEF is not infrequent and was independently associated with increased risk of events (mainly aortic valve replacement events).
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".