MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296163197 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.2695

Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Acute Heart Failure with a Supranormal Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

2022· article· en· W4296163197 on OpenAlexaff
Bart J. van Essen, Jasper Tromp, Jozine M. ter Maaten, Barry Greenberg, Claudio Gimpelewicz, G. Michael Felker, Beth A. Davison, Thomas Severin, Peter S. Pang, Gad Cotter, John R. Teerlink, Marco Metra, Adriaan A. Voors

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
FundersNovartis Pharma
KeywordsEjection fractionMedicineCardiologyHeart failureInternal medicineStroke volume

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: Recent data suggest that guideline-directed medical therapy of patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) might improve clinical outcomes in patients with HF up to a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 55-65%, whereas patients with higher LVEF do not seem to benefit. Recent data have shown that LVEF may have a U-shaped relation with outcome, with poorer outcome also in patients with supranormal values. This suggests that patients with supranormal LVEF may be a distinctive group of patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: RELAX-AHF-2 was a multicentre, placebo-controlled trial on the effects of serelaxin on 180-day cardiovascular (CV) mortality and worsening HF at day 5 in patients with acute HF. Echocardiograms were performed at hospital admission in 6128 patients: 155 (2.5%) patients were classified as HF with supranormal ejection fraction (HFsnEF; LVEF >65%), 1440 (23.5%) as HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF; LVEF 50-65%), 1353 (22.1%) as HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF; LVEF 41-49%) and 3180 (51.9%) as HFrEF (LVEF <40%). Patients with HFsnEF compared to HFpEF were more often women, had higher prevalence of non-ischaemic HF, had lower levels of natriuretic peptides, were less likely to be treated with beta-blockers and had higher blood urea nitrogen plasma levels. All-cause mortality was not statistically different between groups, although patients with HFsnEF had the highest numerical rate. A declining trend was seen in the proportion of 180-day deaths due to CV causes from HFrEF (290/359, 80.8%) to HFsnEF (14/24, 58.3%). The reverse was observed with death from non-CV causes. No treatment effect of serelaxin was observed in any of the subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, only 2.5% of patients were classified as HFsnEF. HFsnEF was primarily characterized by female sex, lower natriuretic peptides and a higher risk of non-CV death.

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 score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score0.569

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations53
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207