Left Ventricular Hypertrabeculation Is Not Associated With Cardiovascular Morbity or Mortality: Insights From the Eurocmr Registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: Left ventricular non-compaction (LVNC) is perceived as a rare high-risk cardiomyopathy characterised by excess left ventricular (LV) trabeculation. However, there is increasing evidence contesting the clinical significance of LV hyper-trabeculation and the existence of LVNC as a distinct cardiomyopathy. The aim of this study is to assess the association of LV trabeculation extent with cardiovascular morbidity and all-cause mortality in patients undergoing clinical cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) scans across 57 European centres from the EuroCMR registry. Methods and Results: We studied 822 randomly selected cases from the EuroCMR registry. Image acquisition was according to international guidelines. We manually segmented images for LV chamber quantification and measurement of LV trabeculation (as per Petersen criteria). We report the association between LV trabeculation extent and important cardiovascular morbidities (stroke, atrial fibrillation, heart failure) and all-cause mortality prospectively recorded over 404 ±82 days of follow-up. Maximal non-compaction to compaction ratio (NC/C) was mean (standard deviation) 1.81 ±0.67, from these, 17% were above the threshold for hyper-trabeculation (NC/C >2.3). LV trabeculation extent was not associated with increased risk of the defined outcomes (morbidities, mortality, LV CMR indices) in the whole cohort, or in sub-analyses of individuals without ischaemic heart disease, or those with NC/C >2.3. Conclusion Among 882 patients undergoing clinical CMR, excess LV trabeculation was not associated with a range of important cardiovascular morbidities or all-cause mortality over approximately 12 months of prospective follow-up. These findings suggest that LV hyper-trabeculation alone is not an indicator for worse cardiovascular prognosis.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".