Incidence of Atrial Fibrillation as the Initial Manifestation of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: Insights From a Catheter Ablation Registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) is a rare form of arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy; a delayed diagnosis can lead to significant consequences. Patients with clinically manifest CS often have minimal extracardiac involvement and thus frequently present initially to cardiology. Indeed, certain specific arrhythmic scenarios should trigger investigations for undiagnosed CS. Atrial fibrillation (AF) has been described as one of the presenting features of CS; however, the incidence of this presentation is not known. Methods: At our institution, cardiac computerized tomography is routinely performed prior to catheter ablation for AF. Noncardiac incidental findings are described by radiologists and are followed-up by interval investigations. We systematically reviewed noncardiac reports from 1574 consecutive patients in our prospective AF ablation registry. Specifically, we used text-scraping techniques to search on the following keywords: "adenopathy" and "sarcoidosis." Detailed chart review of identified cases was then performed to evaluate results of interval investigations and assess long-term outcomes. Results: Twenty of 1574 patients (1.3%) had noncardiac reports containing "adenopathy" and/or "sarcoidosis." After interval imaging and a follow-up period averaging 60 ± 35 months, only 2 patients of 1574 (0.13%) were diagnosed with CS. Four of 20 (20%) had a previous history of extracardiac sarcoidosis, and another 1 of 20 (5%) was subsequently diagnosed with extracardiac sarcoidosis. However, none of these 5 patients had evidence of cardiac involvement. Conclusions: CS is a rare finding among patients undergoing a first-time AF ablation. Our findings suggest that AF is an uncommon initial presentation of CS. Thus, investigations for CS in patients with AF are not warranted routinely, unless additional suggestive clinical features are present.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".