MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cardiac Amyloid - A Hidden Contributor to Cardiac Dysfunction Following Cardiac Surgery: Case Report and Literature Review

2019· review· en· W2994836524 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor A. Flood, Scott H. Bradshaw, John P. Veinot, Vidhya Nair

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Cardiology Reviews · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, Outcomes
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiac amyloidosisOccultInotropeCardiologyAmyloidosisDiastoleCardiac surgeryInternal medicineSurgeryPathologyBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present two patients who underwent cardiac surgery followed by post-operative low cardiac output, diastolic dysfunction and resistance to inotropic support. Despite aggressive medical management, both patients died. At autopsy, the hearts were enlarged and showed previously undiagnosed myocardial and vascular amyloidosis. Occult cardiac amyloidosis is an uncommon, often occult, contributor to post-operative complications post cardiac surgery. Pre-operative or intraoperative myocardial biopsy may be useful in patients with unexplained diastolic dysfunction. Brief Summary: We present two patients who underwent cardiac surgery followed by low cardiac output, diastolic dysfunction and resistance to inotropic support. Cardiac dysfunction was due to occult amyloidosis. Pre-operative or intra-operative myocardial biopsy may be useful in patients with unexplained diastolic dysfunction. With recent therapy advances, classification and possible treatment of amyloid are possible.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.353
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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Cardiology ReviewsSame topicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, OutcomesFrench-language works237,207