Safety of Stress Cardiac Magnetic Resonance in Patients With Moderate to Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dobutamine and adenosine stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is relatively contraindicated in patients with moderate to severe aortic valve stenosis (AS). We aimed to determine the safety of dobutamine and adenosine stress CMR in patients with moderate to severe AS. METHODS: In this retrospective study patients with AS who underwent either dobutamine or adenosine stress CMR for exclusion of obstructive coronary artery disease were enrolled. We recorded clinical data, CMR and echocardiography findings, and complications as well as minor symptoms. Patients with AS were compared to matched individuals without AS. RESULTS: A total of 187 patients with AS were identified and compared to age-, gender- and body mass index-matched 187 patients without AS. No severe complications were reported in the study nor the control group. The reported frequency of non-severe complications and minor symptoms were similar between the study and the control groups. Nineteen patients with AS experienced non-severe complications or minor symptoms during dobutamine stress CMR compared to eighteen patients without AS (p = 0.855). One patient with AS and two patients without AS undergoing adenosine stress CMR experienced minor symptoms (p = 0.562). Four examinations were aborted because of chest pain, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and third-degree atrioventricular block. Inducible ischaemia, prior coronary artery bypass grafting, prior stroke and age were associated with a higher incidence of complications and minor symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate to severe AS was not associated with complications during CMR stress test. The incidence of non-severe complications and minor symptoms was greater with dobutamine.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".