Prevalence of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy according to different diagnostic criteria. Alterations in ultrasonographic parameters of both left and right ventricles before and after stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Prevalence of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy (CC) remains controversial. Several guidelines have been proposed for its assessment. Aim To estimate the frequency of CC by using all of the proposed diagnostic criteria, to describe the whole spectrum of cardiac alterations and investigate the role of stress in unmasking latent cases of CC. Methods Ninety consecutive patients were recruited. CC was evaluated by using the Montreal, the 2009 and 2019 criteria. Dobutamine stress test was also performed. Results LVDD was identified in 72(80%), 36(40%) and 10(11.1%) patients based on the above criteria, respectively. None of the patients had right ventricular systolic dysfunction, neither at rest, nor after stress. Stress test revealed left systolic dysfunction in 4(4.5%) patients. According to 2019 criteria, presence of LVDD was not associated with gender, etiology, or staging of liver disease. Patients with LVDD had longer QTc (p=0.002), larger LAvol (p=0.0001), lower TAPSE(s) (p=0.012), lower SRV(s) (p=0.0001) and lower ΔCI (p=0.009) compared to those without. Patients with Child-B/C had longer QTc (p=0.004), higher BNP (p=0.016), higher E/e’ (p=0.0001) and higher E/e’(s) (p=0.003), compared to Child-A patients. A significant correlation was demonstrated between Child-Pugh score and E/e’ (p=0.0001), or E/e’(s) (p=0.002). Conclusions In accordance with the recent guidelines the prevalence of CC seems to be lower. LVDD is the predominant feature of CC and aggravates along with the severity of liver disease. After dobutamine administration several sonographic variables exacerbate, particularly in Child-B/C patients, indicating a potential higher risk for clinical heart failure during stressful invasive interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".