Mitral Annular Disjunction Assessed Using CMR Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mitral annular disjunction is the atrial displacement of the mural mitral valve leaflet hinge point within the atrioventricular junction. Said to be associated with malignant ventricular arrhythmias and sudden death, its prevalence in the general population is not known. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the frequency of occurrence and extent of mitral annular disjunction in a large population cohort. METHODS: The authors assessed the cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) images in 2,646 Caucasian subjects enrolled in the UK Biobank imaging study, measuring the length of disjunction at 4 points around the mitral annulus, assessing for presence of prolapse or billowing of the leaflets, and for curling motion of the inferolateral left ventricular wall. RESULTS: From 2,607 included participants, the authors found disjunction in 1,990 (76%) cases, most commonly at the anterior and inferior ventricular wall. The authors found inferolateral disjunction, reported as clinically important, in 134 (5%) cases. Prolapse was more frequent in subjects with disjunction (odds ratio [OR]: 2.5; P = 0.02), with positive associations found between systolic curling and disjunction at any site (OR: 3.6; P < 0.01), and systolic curling and prolapse (OR: 71.9; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This large-scale study shows that disjunction is a common finding when using CMR. Disjunction at the inferolateral ventricular wall, however, was rare. The authors found associations between disjunction and both prolapse and billowing of the mural mitral valve leaflet. These findings support the notion that only extensive inferolateral disjunction, when found, warrants consideration of further investigation, but disjunction elsewhere in the annulus should be considered a normal finding.
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 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".