MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Neurovascular Coupling is Blunted in Atrial Fibrillation

2019· article· en· W3175975930 on OpenAlexaff
Rehan T. Junejo, Aaron A. Phillips, Samuel J. E. Lucas, Johannes J. van Lieshout, Gregory Y.H. Lip, James P. Fisher

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersBritish Heart Foundation
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationCardiologyMedicineInternal medicineStroke (engine)AnesthesiaMiddle cerebral arteryNeurovascular bundleCerebral blood flowSurgeryIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People with atrial fibrillation are at an increased risk of stroke, cognitive decline and dementia. We recently identified that individuals with atrial fibrillation exhibit a reduced cerebrovascular reactivity to carbon dioxide, indicative of a diminished cerebral vasodilatory reserve. In this study we sought to determine whether neurovascular coupling (NVC) is blunted in atrial fibrillation in comparison with age‐matched, hypertensive and healthy control participants. Posterior (PCA) and middle cerebral artery (MCA) flow velocity (Vm), along with beat‐to‐beat mean arterial pressure (MAP), were measured during a NVC assessment consisting of five cycles of visual stimulation (reading) for 30 s followed by 30 s with both eyes‐closed in 12 patients with atrial fibrillation (69 [7] yr; mean [SD], 3 women), 13 patients with hypertension (67 [5] yr, 4 women) and 12 healthy control participants (63 [10] yr, 4 women). Cerebrovascular conductance indices (CVCi) were calculated as PCA Vm/MAP and MCA Vm/MAP. NVC was denoted by the peak response observed during visual stimulation and is expressed as a percentage change from the eyes‐closed period. Resting PCA Vm and MCA Vm were not different between the atrial fibrillation (31 [7] and 49 [12] cm/s), hypertension (33 [8] and 55 [12] cm/s), and healthy control (36 [8] and 55 [12] cm/s) groups (P>0.05). Visual stimulation evoked an increase in PCA CVCi in all groups, but the magnitude of the hyperemic response was blunted in patients with atrial fibrillation (18 [8] %) and hypertension (17 [8] %), in comparison with healthy controls (26 [9] %) (P<0.05). Visual stimulation evoked a greater increase in MCA CVCi in the atrial fibrillation group (17 [6] %), than patients with hypertension (10 [4] %) and healthy controls (13 [6] %) (P<0.05). Thus, when peak PCA CVCi responses were considered following subtraction of the peak MCA CVCi responses (i.e., the “non‐selective” effect of the NVC test), a significantly diminished response was observed in the atrial fibrillation group (1 [8] %) compared the hypertension (7 [9] %) and healthy control groups (13 [9] %) (P<0.01). In summary, individuals with atrial fibrillation exhibit a blunted NVC response to visual stimulation when compared to age‐matched, healthy control and hypertensive participants. Additional studies are required to identify the mechanisms for the attenuated cerebral perfusion response of the occipital lobe to visual stimulation in atrial fibrillation (e.g., attenuated neuronal activation, altered cerebrovascular vasodilatory signaling). Support or Funding Information Funded by BHF project grant PG/15/45/31579. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases→French-language works237,207→