OR35. Exercise Effect on Global Myocardial Function Score in Patients with Refractory Angina Undergoing Extracorporeal Shockwave Myocardial Revascularization (ESMR): A Study focusing on Speckle Tracking and Exercise Stress Echocardiography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims Refractory angina pectoris (RAP) is defined as the occurrence of frequent angina attacks uncontrolled by optimal drug therapy. Extracorporeal shockwave myocardial revascularization (ESMR) is one of the alternative therapies that can be performed to treat RAP. Stress echocardiography is necessary to determine the inducible myocardial segments. To date, study evaluating the effect of exercise on myocardial function using WMSI and GLS was still limited. The aim of this study was to show the effect of exercise on global myocardial function evaluated using GLS and WMSI from echocardiography. Methods and Results This is a cross sectional and single center study of 9 Refractory Angina Pectoris patients underwent stress echocardiography from April - June 2021 in Mohammad Hoesin General Hospital, Palembang. Pre and post exercise WMSI and GLS were obtained and analyzed using McNemar non-parametric test. There were no significant differences between both pre and post GLS (p = 0.500) and WMSI (p = 0.250) through exercise stress echocardiography. Conclusion Our study showed no significant difference of global myocardial function evaluated by GLS and WMSI, pre and post exercise. Segmental myocardial function analysis seems to be more potential as useful assessment for RAP undergoing ESMR procedure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".