MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006083427 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2020.02.001

Left Ventricular Thrombus in Myocardial Infarction After Successful Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Prevalence and Predictors—A Middle Eastern Single-Centre Experience

2020· article· en· W3006083427 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac tumors and thrombi
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneous coronary interventionCardiologyInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionThrombusLeft ventricular thrombusPercutaneous

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BackgroundLeft ventricular thrombus (LVT) is a well-recognized complication of myocardial infarction that affects patient outcomes and warrants screening.MethodsThis retrospective study included 308 consecutive patients who presented with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction and were treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention.ResultsEarly screening for LVT by echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance revealed the following: LVT (+) group (36 patients [11.7%]) and LVT (−) group (272 patients [88.3%]). The 2 powerful independent variables associated with LVT formation were left anterior descending–related infarct (odds ratio, 10.17; P < 0.0001) and severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction (odds ratio, 8.3; P = 0.0001). The lower the left ventricular ejection fraction, the higher the risk of LVT was. Multivessel coronary artery disease and the type of early invasive strategy (culprit lesion only vs complete revascularization) were not predictive of LVT. The impact of environment (i.e., hot climate, exercise) and dehydration on the risk of LVT formation is uncertain.ConclusionEarly LVT formation is a frequent complication in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction despite timely intervention. Its independent predictors are left anterior descending–related infarct and severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction. In patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, there was no significant difference between lesion-only culprits and complete revascularization in reducing the risk of LVT development. Further studies in larger numbers of patients are needed because of the uncertainties regarding the links between the biological effects of the environment and the risk of LVT formation.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.232 · 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