Endothelial Dysfunction during Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by high cardiovascular risk, which is further amplified during acute COPD exacerbations (AECOPD). Endothelial dysfunction has been previously suggested as one of the potential pathogenetic mechanisms. In order to study the effects of AECOPD on endothelial function assessed by available functional methods, we performed a literature search involving Pubmed and Scopus databases. Eligible studies were those that included adult patients with COPD and evaluated endothelial damage via semi-invasive or noninvasive functional methods, during AECOPD and after recovery or in stable condition. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was applied to evaluate the quality of retrieved studies. Endothelial function was significantly impaired during AECOPD compared to recovery/stable condition (SMD: −0.87, 95%CI [−1.19, −0.55]). Patients during AECOPD presented a significantly worse response in endothelium-dependent (flow-mediated dilatation WMD: −2.59, 95%CI [−3.75, −1.42]) and independent vasodilation (nitroglycerine-mediated dilatation WMD: −3.13, 95%CI [−5.18, −1.09]) compared to recovery. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the above results. In conclusion, endothelium-dependent and independent vasodilation is worse during AECOPD compared to the stable condition. Endothelial dysfunction could play a role in the high cardiovascular risk during AECOPD.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".