MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Refining the accuracy of right ventricular-pulmonary arterial coupling in patients undergoing transcatheter tricuspid valve treatment

2022· article· en· W4306254319 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Atsushi Sugiura, Tetsu Tanaka, Sebastian Zimmer, G Nickenig, Marcel Weber

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeInternal medicineCardiologyPulmonary arteryRisk stratificationCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyHeart failureSurgeryMyocardial infarctionAngina

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Assessing right-ventricular (RV) function is paramount for risk stratification but remains challenging in patients with TR. RV-pulmonary artery (PA) coupling seems more feasible for the assessment of RV function. Methods We assessed RV-PA coupling by the ratio of TAPSE and PASP at baseline, in which PASP was measured both by echocardiography (ePASP) and invasively using a right-heart catheter (iPASP). We also assessed the RV fractional-area change (RVFAC) as measured by transthoracic echocardiography. Participants for the present study comprised patients undergoing TTVR from June 2015 to July 2021 at the University Hospital of Bonn. Patients lacking either echocardiographic or invasive measurements for the assessment of RV-PA coupling were excluded from the analysis. The outcome was defined as a composite of mortality and rehospitalization due to heart failure within one year after the procedure. Results A total of 206 patients were included in the present analysis. The participants were at an advanced age (78.5±7.1 years), predominantly female (58.3%), and at a high risk for surgery (EuroSCORE II: 7.4±4.8%). Massive/torrential TR was observed in 100 of these patients. With the median follow-up duration of 201 days (interquartile range 98–424 days), the outcome occurred in 57 patients. Compared to TAPSE/ePASP, TAPSE/iPASP showed better predictability for the outcome: the AUCs were 0.582 for TAPSE/ePASP and increased to 0.714 when iPASP was applied to the formula (i.e. TAPSE/iPASP). The trend was also true for RV-PA coupling using RVFAC (AUCs: 0.561 for RVFAC/ePASP, 0.693 for RVFAC/iPASP). There was a significant correlation between ePASP and iPASP, whereas the correlation was attenuated in patients with TR beyond severe (i.e. massive/torrential TR) (interaction p = 0.01). In addition, a semiquantitative echocardiographic estimation of right atrial (RA) pressure was not correlated with the invasive measurement. Conclusion The present analysis confirms that RV-PA coupling, measured as TAPSE/PASP, is a powerful predictor of mortality and rehospitalization due to heart failure in patients undergoing TTVR. The predictability is even more improved if PA pressure is measured invasively and applied to the formulas. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments→French-language works237,207→