MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163903399 · doi:10.1002/ehf2.13417

Cardiac Reverse Remodelling and Health Status in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure

2021· article· en· W3163903399 on OpenAlexafffund
Kaiming Wang, Erik Youngson, Jeffrey A. Bakal, Jissy Thomas, Finlay A. McAlister, Gavin Y. Oudit

Bibliographic record

VenueESC Heart Failure · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsCanadian Patient Safety InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity Hospital FoundationCanadian HIV Trials Network, Canadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEjection fractionMedicineHeart failureCardiologyInternal medicineOdds ratioConfidence intervalStroke volumeVentricular remodeling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: This study aims to assess long-term changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) together with echocardiographic markers of cardiac remodelling and their association with prognosis and patient-reported quality of life (QoL). METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of serial echocardiograms performed between January 2009 and December 2019 in 1089 patients (median age 63 years, 71.0% men) enrolled in the Mazankowski Heart Function Clinic Registry who had at least two echocardiograms separated by ≥12 months. We classified the patients into four subgroups by their baseline and LVEF trajectories: persistent heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (persistent HFrEF, n = 364), recovered ejection fraction (HFrecEF, n = 325), transient recovery in ejection fraction (HFtrecEF, n = 117), and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF, n = 283); 4490 echocardiograms were included in the present analysis, with 4.1 ± 1.8 echocardiograms available per patient during follow-up. Reductions in echocardiographic markers of cardiac remodelling, including LVIDd [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 2.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.75-2.86], LVIDs (aOR: 2.44, 95% CI 2.00-2.94), left ventricular mass index (aOR: 1.15, 95% CI 1.09-1.22), E/e' ratio (aOR: 1.15, 95% CI 1.02-1.30), left atrial volume index (aOR: 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.16), along with an increase in the maximum recommended daily dose of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (aOR: 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.07) and mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists (aOR: 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.11) at 2 years, strongly predicted the HFrecEF classification, which was further sustained at 5 years of follow-up. However, changes in these parameters were mostly absent in patients experiencing only a transient recovery in LVEF (HFtrecEF), closely resembling patients with persistent HFrEF. In the multivariable analysis, HFrecEF patients had lower risk of all-cause mortality alone [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.46, 95% CI 0.23-0.93], and composite all-cause (aHR: 0.59, 95% CI 0.49-0.73), cardiovascular (aHR: 0.47, 95% CI 0.36-0.61), and heart failure (aHR: 0.50, 95% CI 0.35-0.70) related hospitalizations with mortality than patients with persistent HFrEF. QoL assessed through the shortened Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 at the end of follow-up was greater in patients with HFrecEF by 5.2, 12.4, and 9.4 points than persistent HFrEF, HFtrecEF, and HFpEF, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HFrecEF experienced progressive normalization in echocardiographic markers of cardiac remodelling characterized by reductions in left ventricular dimensions and mass in tandem with reductions in left atrial volume and E/e' ratio, which is associated with better prognosis and QoL.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESC Heart FailureSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207