Evaluation of left atrial remodeling in kidney transplant patients using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increased left atrial (LA) size predicts cardiovascular events in patients with end-stage kidney disease. There is a paucity of data on LA changes after kidney transplantation (KT). Accordingly, we used cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) to evaluate LA remodeling after KT, and examined its relationship with left ventricular (LV) measurements, blood pressure and cardiac biomarkers. METHODS: In this prospective multi-center cohort study, 39 pre-transplant dialysis patients underwent KT and 42 eligible transplant recipients remained on dialysis. CMR, blood pressure and serum measurements for N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), and growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) were performed at baseline and 12 months. RESULTS: After 12 months, there were no significant changes in LA end-systolic volume index, LA end-diastolic volume index, or LA ejection fraction (LAEF) within the KT or dialysis group; changes over time did not differ between the 2 groups (all p > 0.25). At baseline and over 12 months, LA volumes and LAEF positively correlated with LV volumes and mass while LAEF positively correlated with LV function. Changes in LA volumes also positively correlated with NT-proBNP and systolic blood pressure (sBP) while LAEF negatively correlated with NT-proBNP. GDF-15 correlated with LA measurements at baseline but not in 12-month changes. hsCRP did not correlate with any LA measurements. CONCLUSIONS: LA volumes and function as measured by CMR did not change significantly over 12 months post-KT. There were significant associations between LA and LV remodeling, NT-proBNP and sBP, suggesting common underlying pathophysiological mechanisms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".