MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Ejection dynamics in native aortic valve stenosis using echocardiography: can it be helpful?

2021· article· en· W3205245198 on OpenAlexaff
Monica Bawor, Kezhuan Gu, Kevin J. Um, Brittany B. Dennis, Darryl P. Leong

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research InstituteMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyEjection fractionInternal medicineObservational studyRandomized controlled trialDoppler echocardiographyStenosisRadiologyBlood pressureHeart failureDiastole

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The assessment of aortic stenosis (AS) severity has a major impact on the management of affected patients. Ejection dynamics, including acceleration time (AT), ejection time (ET), and acceleration time/ejection time ratio (AT/ET) measured using doppler echocardiography are established in the evaluation of prosthetic aortic valve stenosis with high sensitivity and specificity. However, their clinical utility in native AS has not been well described. Purpose The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ejection dynamics to identify severe AS and to assess whether ejection dynamics can differentiate low flow, low gradient severe AS from pseudo-severe AS. Methods We conducted a systematic review of Medline, Embase, and Web of Science from database inception until January 2021. We included observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which the diagnostic accuracy of ejection dynamics by doppler echocardiography for severe AS was compared with standard echocardiographic diagnostic criteria including peak velocity, mean pressure gradient, aortic valve area, and dimensionless index. Studies were eligible if they included AS of at least mild severity. Two authors independently screened and extracted data. Results We included 12 studies in the review (RCT=1, observational=11) with a total of 5182 participants. There was significant inconsistency in outcome measurement and reporting of results therefore a meta-analysis was not suitable. We used narrative synthesis to report our results. All included studies used standard echocardiographic criteria to ascertain the presence of severe AS. Mean age was 72 years and 53% of the participants were male. 1983 participants (38.3%) were classified as having severe AS. AT >94–109ms had sensitivity of 74–92% and specificity of 72–89% at identifying severe AS. AT/ET >0.34–0.35 showed sensitivity of 67–77% and specificity of 68–100%. Only one study compared low-flow, low-gradient AS with pseudo-severe AS, showing that an AT >100ms had sensitivity 62%, specificity 76%; and AT/ET >0.33, sensitivity 65%, specificity 84%. Data for ET showed insufficient consistency and diagnostic accuracy. Conclusions AT and AT/ET may be useful to corroborate the presence of severe AS. However, more research is needed to understand whether these parameters add incremental prognostic value to standard echocardiographic measures of AS severity. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Summary of evidence search and selection

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.124
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.124
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.007
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.310 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→