Prospective follow-up in various subtypes of cardiomyopathies: insights from the ESC EORP Cardiomyopathy Registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) European Observational Research Programme (EORP) Cardiomyopathy Registry is a prospective multinational registry of consecutive patients with cardiomyopathies. The objective of this report is to describe the short-term outcomes of adult patients (≥18 years old). METHODS AND RESULTS: Out of 3208 patients recruited, follow-up data at 1 year were obtained in 2713 patients (84.6%) [1420 with hypertrophic (HCM); 1105 dilated (DCM); 128 arrhythmogenic right ventricular (ARVC); and 60 restrictive (RCM) cardiomyopathies]. Improvement of symptoms (dyspnoea, chest pain, and palpitations) was globally observed over time (P < 0.05 for each). Additional invasive procedures were performed: prophylactic implantation of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) (5.2%), pacemaker (1.2%), heart transplant (1.1%), ablation for atrial or ventricular arrhythmia (0.5% and 0.1%). Patients with atrial fibrillation increased from 28.7% to 32.2% of the cohort. Ventricular arrhythmias (VF/ventricular tachycardias) in ICD carriers (primary prevention) at 1 year were more frequent in ARVC, then in DCM, HCM, and RCM (10.3%, 8.2%, 7.5%, and 0%, respectively). Major cardiovascular events (MACE) occurred in 29.3% of RCM, 10.5% of DCM, 5.3% of HCM, and 3.9% of ARVC (P < 0.001). MACE were more frequent in index patients compared to relatives (10.8% vs. 4.4%, P < 0.001), more frequent in East Europe centres (13.1%) and least common in South Europe (5.3%) (P < 0.001). Subtype of cardiomyopathy, geographical region, and proband were predictors of MACE on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Despite symptomatic improvement, patients with cardiomyopathies remain prone to major clinical events in the short term. Outcomes were different not only according to cardiomyopathy subtypes but also in relatives vs. index patients, and according to European regions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".