MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281488577 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jeac089

Comprehensive myocardial characterization using cardiac magnetic resonance associates with outcomes in low gradient severe aortic stenosis

2022· article· en· W4281488577 on OpenAlexafffund
Miho Fukui, Mohamed‐Salah Annabi, Vitor Emer Egypto Rosa, Henrique Barbosa Ribeiro, Larissa Stanberry, Marie‐Annick Clavel, Josep Rodés‐Cabau, Flávio Tarasoutchi, Erik B. Schelbert, Jutta Bergler‐Klein, Philipp E. Bartko, Carolina Donà, Julia Mascherbauer, Abdellaziz Dahou, Carlos Eduardo Rochitte, Philippe Pîbarot, João L. Cavalcante

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCardiologyMedicineEjection fractionInternal medicineStroke volumeHazard ratioStenosisHeart failureMagnetic resonance imagingProspective cohort studyRadiologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: This study sought to compare cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) characteristics according to different flow/gradient patterns of aortic stenosis (AS) and to evaluate their prognostic value in patients with low-gradient AS. METHODS AND RESULTS: This international prospective multicentric study included 147 patients with low-gradient moderate to severe AS who underwent comprehensive CMR evaluation of left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS), extracellular volume fraction (ECV), and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). All patients were classified as followings: classical low-flow low-gradient (LFLG) [mean gradient (MG) < 40 mmHg and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50%]; paradoxical LFLG [MG < 40 mmHg, LVEF ≥ 50%, and stroke volume index (SVi) < 35 ml/m2]; and normal-flow low-gradient (MG < 40 mmHg, LVEF ≥ 50%, and SVi ≥ 35 ml/m2). Patients with classical LFLG (n = 90) had more LV adverse remodelling including higher ECV, and higher LGE and volume, and worst LVGLS. Over a median follow-up of 2 years, 43 deaths and 48 composite outcomes of death or heart failure hospitalizations occurred. Risks of adverse events increased per tertile of LVGLS: hazard ratio (HR) = 1.50 [95% CI, 1.02-2.20]; P = 0.04 for mortality; HR = 1.45 [1.01-2.09]; P < 0.05 for composite outcome; per tertile of ECV, HR = 1.63 [1.07-2.49]; P = 0.02 for mortality; HR = 1.54 [1.02-2.33]; P = 0.04 for composite outcome. LGE presence also associated with higher mortality, HR = 2.27 [1.01-5.11]; P < 0.05 and composite outcome, HR = 3.00 [1.16-7.73]; P = 0.02. The risk of mortality and the composite outcome increased in proportion to the number of impaired components (i.e. LVGLS, ECV, and LGE) with multivariate adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: In this international prospective multicentric study of low-gradient AS, comprehensive CMR assessment provides independent prognostic value that is cumulative and incremental to clinical and echocardiographic characteristics.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular ImagingSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207