MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999128742 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jez319.149

P296 The effect of ideal BSA in patients with moderate aortic stenosis?

2020· article· en· W2999128742 on OpenAlexaff
M Cases, T. Zhu, U. Jurt, D. Brouillard, M. Matangi

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBody surface areaStenosisMedicineCardiologyRegurgitation (circulation)Internal medicineAortic valveEjection fractionBody weightMitral regurgitationHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract INTRODUCTION The current obesity epidemic has an impact on calculated BSA. Obesity significantly increases the calculated BSA from what the ideal BSA would be if based on a patient’s ideal body weight. PURPOSE To determine the effect of ideal BSA on AV area index in patients with moderate aortic stenosis and normal left ventricular function. METHODS Our ECHO database was searched for all patients with an LVEF >50% and moderate aortic stenosis based on a mean aortic gradient of 20-39 mmHg and an AV area >1.00 cm2. Patients with more than mild aortic regurgitation, previous valvular repair or replacement, significant mitral valve disease or any LV wall motion abnormalities were excluded. Ideal weight was calculated using the Devine formula = Constant + 2.3 x [height in inches-60], where constant= 50Kg in males and 45.5Kg in females). Body surface area in m2 was calculated using the formula = [√ (height in cm x weight in Kg)/3600]. The paired t-test was used to determine differences between means and the Fisher’s exact test was used to determine differences between proportions. A p value of <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS There were 210 females (mean age 75.4 ± 11.9 years, mean AV gradient 25.3 ± 4.8 mmHg, mean AVA 1.28 ± 0.27 cm2) and 385 males (mean age 72.7 ± 11.3 years, mean AV gradient 25.9 ± 5.2 mmHg, mean AVA 1.32 ± 0.28 cm2). Other important variables are seen in table 1. There were highly significant differences between actual and ideal measurements of weight, BSA and AV area index. Based on the actual BSA there were 151 of 385 male patients (39.2%) with severe aortic stenosis (<0.60 cm2/m2), which dropped to 66 of 385 patients (17.1%) when the ideal BSA was used in the calculation (P < 0.0001, Fisher’s exact test). For females there were 44 of 210 patients with severe aortic stenosis (21.0%) which dropped to 3 (1.4%) when the ideal BSA was used in the calculation (P < 0.0001, Fisher’s exact test). CONCLUSIONS Use of the ideal BSA, based on ideal weight, significantly reclassifies women in terms of AS severity and will be consistent throughout time. All mean aortic gradients and AV areas, by definition, and 98.6% of the ideal AV area indices being in the moderate AS range. The data is less compelling in males but is still significantly improved with 82.9% of AV area indices being correctly assigned. Table 1. Weight/kg (Females) Weight/kg (Males) BSA/m2 (Females) BSA/m2 (Males) AVAI (Females) AVAI (Males) Actual. 77.5 ± 21.4 90.1 ± 16.9 1.79 ± 0.23 2.04 ± 0.20 0.72 ± 0.16 0.65 ± 0.14 Ideal. 51.6 ± 6.2 69.3 ± 7.1 1.51 ± 0.12 1.83 ± 0.14 0.85 ± 0.17 0.73 ± 0.16 P value. <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 AVAI = Aortic valve area index (cm2/m2). BSA = Body surface area (m2).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular ImagingSame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207