Left ventricular longitudinal shortening in patients with aortic stenosis: relationship with symptomatic status.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Symptomatic status in aortic stenosis is not always related to hemodynamic severity as estimated by the aortic valve effective orifice area (AVA), and other factors may be involved. It has been seen previously that, whilst ejection fraction is preserved, left ventricular (LV) longitudinal shortening may be selectively decreased in aortic stenosis, and hypothesized that this might be a marker of subendocardial ischemia as subendocardial myocardial fibers are oriented longitudinally. The present study examined the possible relationship between LV longitudinal shortening and symptoms in patients with aortic stenosis. METHODS: Relevant clinical and echocardiographic variables, including the percentage of LV longitudinal shortening, were measured in 131 consecutive patients with at least moderate aortic stenosis (AVA <1.5 cm2). RESULTS: Symptoms were found in 106 patients (exertional dyspnea 93%, resting dyspnea 25%, angina 57%, syncope 27%). Compared with asymptomatic patients, symptomatic patients had a smaller AVA (0.91 +/- 0.27 versus 1.13 +/- 0.20 cm2; p < 0.001), a lower LV longitudinal shortening (19 +/- 13 versus 28 +/- 9%; p = 0.01), and higher incidence of coronary artery disease (52 versus 20%, p < 0.008). Other variables significantly associated with symptoms included age, previous myocardial infarction, obesity, indexed AVA, LV mass index, LV ejection fraction, cardiac index, energy loss index, and valvular resistance. However, in multivariate analysis, the only variables independently associated with symptomatic status were patient age (p = 0.03), indexed AVA (p = 0.006), and LV longitudinal shortening (p = 0.04). The combination of indexed AVA with LV longitudinal shortening resulted in an improvement of the performance for the prediction of symptoms. CONCLUSION: These results show that LV longitudinal shortening is more closely associated with changes in symptomatic status than other currently used indices of LV systolic function. As such, it probably more closely reflects alterations in subendocardial myocardial function.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".