Prevalence and Incidence of Intra-Ventricular Conduction Delays and Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: Insights from PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The importance of intra-ventricular conduction delay (IVCD), the incidence of new IVCD and its relationship to outcomes in heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are not well studied. We addressed these questions in the PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE trials. METHODS AND RESULTS: The risk of the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization and all-cause mortality were estimated by use of Cox regression according to baseline QRS duration and morphology in 11 861 patients without an intracardiac device. At baseline, 1789 (15.1%) patients had left bundle branch block (LBBB), 524 (4.4%) right bundle branch block (RBBB), 454 (3.8%) non-specific IVCD, 2588 (21.8%) 'mildly abnormal' QRS (110-129 ms) and 6506 (54.9%) QRS <110 ms. During a median follow-up of 2.5 years, the risk of the primary composite endpoint was higher among those with a wide QRS, irrespective of morphology: hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) LBBB 1.36 (1.23-1.50), RBBB 1.54 (1.31-1.79), non-specific IVCD 1.65 (1.40-1.94) and QRS 110-129 ms 1.35 (1.23-1.47), compared with QRS duration <110 ms. A total of 1234 (15.6%) patients developed new-onset QRS widening ≥130 ms (6.1 per 100 patient-years). Incident LBBB occurred in 495 (6.3%) patients (2.4 per 100 patient-years) and was associated with a higher risk of the primary composite outcome [hazard ratio 1.42 (1.12-1.82)]. CONCLUSION: In patients with HFrEF, a wide QRS was associated with worse clinical outcomes irrespective of morphology. The annual incidence of new-onset LBBB was around 2.5%, and associated with a higher risk of adverse outcomes, highlighting the importance of repeat electrocardiogram review. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT0083658 (ATMOSPHERE) and NCT01035255 (PARADIGM-HF).
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".