MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201052954 · doi:10.1007/s00330-021-08246-5

CT-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRct) for functional coronary artery evaluation in the follow-up of patients after heart transplantation

2021· article· en· W3201052954 on OpenAlexaff
Ricardo P.J. Budde, Fay M. A. Nous, Stefan Roest, Alina A. Constantinescu, Koen Nieman, Jasper J. Brugts, Lynne Koweek, Alexander Hirsch, Jonathon Leipsic, Olivier C. Manintveld

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Radiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaProvidence Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFractional flow reserveStenosisCardiologyInternal medicineHeart transplantationRadiologyArteryCircumflexTransplantationCoronary angiographyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Invasively measured fractional flow reserve (FFR) is associated with outcome in heart transplant (HTx) patients. Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA)-derived FFR (FFRct) provides additional functional information from anatomical CT images. We describe the first use of FFRct in HTx patients. METHODS: HTx patients underwent CCTA with FFRct to screen for cardiac allograft vasculopathy. FFRct was measured distal to each coronary stenosis > 30% and FFRct ≤ 0.8 indicated hemodynamically significant stenosis. FFRct was also measured at the most distal location of each vessel. Overall distal FFRct was calculated as the mean of the distal values in the left, right, and circumflex coronary artery in each patient. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients (age 56 (42-65) years, 63% males) at 11 (8-16) years after HTx were included. Eighteen (25%) patients had a focal hemodynamically significant stenosis (stenosis > 30% with FFRct ≤ 0.8). In the 55 patients without a hemodynamically significant focal FFRct stenosis (FFRct > 0.80), the distal left anterior descending artery FFRct was < 0.90 in 74% of the patients and 10 (18%) patients had ≥ 1 coronary artery with a distal FFRct ≤ 0.8, including 1 with a distal FFRct ≤ 0.8 in all coronaries. Overall distal FFRct in patients without focal stenosis was 0.88 (0.86-0.91), 0.87 (0.86-0.90), and 0.88 (0.86-0.91) (median with 25th-75th percentile) at 5-9, 10-14, or ≥ 15 years post-transplantation, respectively (p = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: FFRct performed on CCTA scans of HTx patients demonstrated that 25% of patients had a focal coronary stenosis with FFRct ≤ 0.8. Even without a focal stenosis, FFRct values are often abnormal in HTx patients. KEY POINTS: • This is the first report describing the use of FFRct in in heart transplant patients. • FFRct identifies patients after heart transplantation with hemodynamically significant coronary stenosis. • Even without a focal stenosis, FFRct values are often abnormal in heart transplant 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean RadiologySame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207