MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Myocardial Transmural Electrical Disruption Affects Electrogram Pattern

2019· article· en· W2999492350 on OpenAlexaff
Mirabeau Saha, Caroline H. Roney, Hubert Cochet, Steven Niederer, Edward J. Vigmond, Stanley Nattel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndocardiumCardiologyInternal medicineFibrosisAtrial fibrillationAblationClassification of discontinuitiesElectrophysiologyMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Myocardial structural remodeling leads to atrial fibrillation (AF). Interstitial collagen deposits remodel myocardium, causing disruption of electrical propagation between the endocardial and the epicardial layers, and affecting propagation within layers as well. How these changes manifest on the electrogram (EGM) is unclear. Here we investigate the consequences of epicardium- endocardium electrical dissociation on EGMs. Left atrial patient-specific bilayer computational models were constructed using MRI from AF patients (n = 11). Interstitial collagen was incorporated as microstructural discontinuities within layers and causing transmural dissociation in the high-fibrosis areas. The models where the fibrosis was not included were considered as controls. Changes in the unipolar EGM characteristics were computed. A propagation delay was observed between both layers. No monotonic linear relationship between control and fibrotic EGMs was found. With the collagen deposits, amplitude decreases and increased fractionation on EGMs were significant. EGM area also tended to become smaller, and duration and waveform asymmetry were affected. In conclusion, measurements of EGM morphology can be used together with clinical imaging data to distinguish between different substrate modifications, and better select ablation targets.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→