Effectiveness of medical therapy for treatment of idiopathic frequent premature ventricular complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The relative effectiveness of medical therapy compared with a conservative approach of monitoring in patients with idiopathic frequent premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) is uncertain. We evaluated the effectiveness of medical versus conservative therapy for frequent PVCs. METHODS: Patients with frequent PVCs (≥5%) were prospectively enrolled in this cohort study between 2016 and 2020. In patients with normal cardiac function and no structural heart disease, those receiving medical therapy were compared with controls without therapy. Patients were followed longitudinally for change in PVC burden and with serial echocardiography. RESULTS: Overall, 120 patients met inclusion criteria (mean: 56.5 ± 14.6 years, 54.2% female) with 53 on beta-blockers or calcium channel blockers (BBs/CCBs), 27 on Class I or III antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs), and 40 patients treated conservatively. Median initial PVC burden ranged from 15.5% to 20.6%. The median relative reduction of PVCs was 32.7%, 30.5%, and 81.3%, in the conservative therapy, BBs/CCBs, and AADs cohorts, respectively. AADs had greater PVC reduction compared with BBs/CCBs (p = 0.017) and conservative therapy (p = 0.045). PVC reduction to <1% was comparable across groups at 35.0%, 17.0%, 33.3%, respectively. Four patients (4/120, 3.3%) developed left ventricular dysfunction. Rates of adverse drug reactions and medication discontinuation were similar between groups, with no serious adverse events noted. CONCLUSION: In patients with idiopathic frequent PVCs, BB, and CCB have limited effectiveness in PVC reduction. Class I and III AADs have superior effectiveness for medical therapy in symptomatic patients, but only achieved complete PVC resolution suppression in one-third of patients.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".