MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4323039227 · doi:10.1101/2023.02.27.23286540

Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography in Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis

2023· preprint· en· W4323039227 on OpenAlexaff
Nils Sofus Borg Mogensen, Mulham Ali, Rasmus Carter‐Storch, Mohamed‐Salah Annabi, Jasmine Grenier-Delaney, Jacob Eifer Møller, Kristian Altern Øvrehus, Patricia A. Pellikka, Philippe Pîbarot, Marie‐Annick Clavel, Jordi S. Dahl

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEjection fractionMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineStenosisStroke volumeDobutamineHeart failureHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) is recommended by guidelines to distinguish between true-severe and pseudo-severe aortic stenosis (AS) in patients with low-gradients and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50%. However, DSE has mostly been tested in the setting of LVEF<35% and determination of AS severity has mostly been based on outcome data and surgeon’s evaluation. The purpose of this study was to examine the diagnostic accuracy of guideline recommendations for DSE, in patents with low-gradient severe AS with a wide range of LVEF and to examine the interaction between the diagnostic accuracy of DSE and LVEF. Furthermore, we wanted to study the safety and feasibility of DSE in patients with LVEF>50%. Methods Patients with aortic mean gradient <40 mmHg, AVA <1.0 cm 2 , and stroke volume index ≤35 mL/m 2 undergoing DSE and Cardiac Computer Tomography (C-CT) were identified from three prospectively collected patient cohorts, and stratified according to LVEF; LVEF <35%, LVEF 35-50% & LVEF >50%. Severe AS was defined as AVC score ≥2000 AU among men, and ≥1200 AU for women on C-CT. Results Two hundred twenty-one patients were included in the study. Seventy-eight (35%) presented with LVEF <35%, 67 (30%) with LVEF 35-50%, and 76 (34%) with LVEF >50%. DSE was performed without adverse symptoms or significant arrhythmias in 215 (96%) patients and stroke volume increased uniformly with no significant differences between groups (p=0.28). Mean gradient and V max during DSE showed significantly diagnostic heterogeneity between LVEF groups, being most precise when LVEF <35% (both AUC=0.90), albeit with optimal thresholds of 30 mmHg & 377 cm/s, and a limited diagnostic yield in patients with LVEF≥35% (AUC=0.67 in LVEF 35-50% and AUC 0.65 in LVEF≥35%). Using guideline thresholds led to a sensitivity and specificity of 49%/84% for all patients with LVEF <50%. Conclusion While DSE is safe and leads to a uniform increase in stroke volume in patients with low gradient AS regardless of baseline LVEF, the association between DSE gradients and AS severity assessed by C-CT demonstrates important heterogeneity depending on LVEF, with highest accuracy in patients with LVEF <35%. Clinical perspective What is new? Dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) is safe in patients with low-gradient AS with LVEF >50%, and leads to similar increase in stroke volume as in patients with LVEF <50%. The diagnostic accuracy of DSE, compared to AVC as the reference for severe AS, depends on LVEF with highest accuracy in patients with LVEF <35%. Suggested reference thresholds for DSE may not be the most accurate for AS severity, when compared to AVC. What are the clinical implications? Based on our study, we suggest that DSE should primarily be used for determining AS severity in patients with LVEF <35%.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→