MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993578026 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2019.01515

Hypocapnia Alone Fails to Provoke Important Electrocardiogram Changes in Coronary Artery Diseased Patients

2020· article· en· W2993578026 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael J. Parkes, James P Sheppard, Thomas Barker, Aaron M. Ranasinghe, Eshan Senanayake, T. H. Clutton-Brock, Michael Frenneaux

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNational Health and Medical Research CouncilWellcome Trust
KeywordsCardiologyHypocapniaInternal medicineMedicineCoronary artery diseaseElectrocardiographyArteryCardiorespiratory fitness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. There is still an urgent clinical need to develop non-invasive diagnostic tests for early ischaemic heart disease because, once angina occurs, it is too late. Hypocapnia has long been known to cause coronary artery vasoconstriction. Some new cardiology tests are accompanied by the claim that they must have potential diagnostic value if hypocapnia enhances their cardiac effects in healthy subjects. But no previous study has tested whether hypocapnia produces bigger cardiac effects in patients with angina than in healthy subjects. Methods Severe hypocapnia (a PetCO2 level of 20 mmHg) lasting >15 minutes was mechanically induced by facemask, while conscious and unmedicated, in 18 healthy subjects and in 10 patients with angina and angiographically confirmed coronary artery disease, awaiting by-pass surgery. Each participant was their own control in normocapnia (where CO2 was added to the inspirate) and the order of normocapnia and hypocapnia was randomised. 12 lead electrocardiograms (ECG) were recorded and automated measurements were made on all ECG waveforms averaged over >120 beats. 2D echocardiography was also performed on healthy subjects. Results In the 18 healthy subjects we confirm that severe hypocapnia (a mean PetCO2 of 20±0 mmHg, P0.05) on their electro- or echocardiogram. All 10 angina patients tolerated the mechanical hyperventilation well, with minimal discomfort. Hypocapnia caused similar ECG increase in V1 (by 39%, P0.05 vs., healthy controls) and did not induce angina. Its effects were no greater in patients who did not take -blockers, or did not take organic nitrates, or had the worst Canadian Cardiovascular Society scores. Conclusions Non-invasive mechanical hyperventilation while awake and unmedicated is safe and acceptable, even to patients with angina. Using it to produce severe and prolonged hypocapnia alone does produce significant ECG changes in angina patients. But its potential diagnostic value for identifying patients with coronary stenosis requires further evaluation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207