MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3203750321 · doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2020-bcs.58

58 First-phase ejection fraction predicts repsonse to cardiac resynchronization therapy and adverse outcomes

2020· article· en· W3203750321 on OpenAlexaff
Haotian Gu, Baldeep S. Sidhu, Lingyun Fang, Jessica Webb, Tom Jackson, Simon Claridge, Reza Razavi, Phil Chowienczyk, Christopher A. Rinaldi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionCardiologyInternal medicineCardiac resynchronization therapyHeart failureConfidence intervalOdds ratioDiastoleSystoleEnd-systolic volumeStroke volumeNuclear medicineBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) is an important therapeutic treatment for chronic heart failure. However, even in carefully selected cases up to 40% of patient fail to respond. First-phase ejection fraction (EF1), the ejection fraction up to the time of maximal ventricular contraction, is a novel and more sensitive echocardiographic measure of early systolic function. We examined the value of EF1, to predict response to CRT and clinical outcomes after CRT. Methods Echocardiography was performed in 197 patients (table 1) who underwent CRT between 2009 and 2018 and were followed to determine clinical outcomes. LV volumes were measured by 2D Simpson’s method from apical views at end-diastole, time of peak aortic valve flow and end-systole to give end-diastolic volume (EDV), volume at TPAVF (V1) and ESV. 3D echocardiography was performed in a sub-sample of patients (n=73) allowing automated determination of EF1. EF1 was calculated as the percentage change between EDV and V1: EF 1= (EDV – V1) / EDV x 100 %. Results Volumetric response rate (reduction in end-systolic volume ≥ 15%) was 92.3% vs. 12.1%, for those with EF1 in the highest vs. lowest tertiles (p<0.001). A cut-off value of 11.9% for EF1 had > 85% sensitivity and specificity for prediction of response to CRT; on multivariate binary logistic regression analysis incorporating previously defined predictors (table 2) EF1 was the strongest predictor of response (odds ratio: 1.563, 95% confidence interval: 1.371-1.782, per 1% change in EF1, p<0.001). EF1 was also the strongest predictor of a clinical composite score (odds ratio: 1.115, 95% confidence interval: 1.044-1.191, p=0.001). The c-statistic index for a logistic model (including age, gender, presence of AF, ischaemic aetiology, SF, ApRock, presence of LBBB and QRS duration) increased significantly by adding EF1 (from 0.720 to 0.922: change in the c-statistic 0.202, p<0.01). Improvement in EF1 at 6 months (figure 1) after CRT implantation (6.5±5.8% vs 1.8±4.3% in responders vs. non-responders, p<0.001) was the best predictor of heart failure re-hospitalization and death after median follow-up of 29.2 months (HR: 0.819, 95%CI:0.765-0.876, p<0.001) (figure 2). Conclusion EF1, a simple measure of early systolic function, is a promising predictor of response to CRT and may be useful in selecting patients for CRT and as a target for optimising CRT and other measures to improve outcomes in patients with HFrEF. Conflict of Interest None

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies→French-language works237,207→