Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with takotsubo syndrome versus spontaneous coronary artery dissection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) and spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) are now increasingly recognized. Both conditions predominantly affect females; however, the exact pathophysiology remains unclear. Large multi-center databases can help elucidate the underlying mechanism and optimize treatments to improve outcomes by allowing us to compare features and outcomes of patients with TTS and patients with SCAD. METHODS: Takotsubo syndrome patients were enrolled from the International Takotsubo Registry and compared to SCAD patients from the Canadian Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection Cohort Study. In total 2098 TTS patients and 750 SCAD patients were included in the present study. RESULTS: More than 85% of patients in both groups were females. TTS patients were older compared to SCAD patients. Physical triggers were more common in TTS patients, while emotional triggers and non-identifiable triggering events were more common in SCAD patients. Left ventricular ejection fraction was more impaired in TTS compared to SCAD. TTS patients had more major cardiovascular risk factors, while SCAD patients had a higher rate of migraines and anxiety disorders than TTS patients. Thirty-day mortality was significantly higher in TTS patients, while 30-day stroke rates were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that women are at higher risk for TTS and SCAD compared to men, which should be considered in the differential diagnosis of those presenting with acute coronary syndrome. Additionally, emotional stressors play a significant role in triggering events particularly in younger women suffering from SCAD. The present findings may help clinicians better differentiate these two entities and aid in the appropriate risk stratification, diagnosis, and management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT01947621.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".