Dyspnoea in a patient with biopsy-proven pulmonary sarcoidosis: the challenges in diagnosing cardiac sarcoidosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A man in his 60s with biopsy-proven pulmonary sarcoidosis, not on treatment, presented with 6 weeks of dyspnea to the emergency department. ECG showed first-degree atrioventricular block and CT thorax demonstrated progressive pulmonary sarcoidosis with new multifocal consolidation. Antibiotics were initiated.A brain natriuretic peptide was elevated at 2024 ng/L and echocardiogram showed global left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Coronary angiogram revealed normal coronary arteries, and cardiac positron emission tomography and MRI demonstrated patterns compatible with cardiac sarcoidosis. The patient significantly improved with diuresis; he was started on prednisone, methotrexate and standard heart failure therapies.We outline the difficulties of attributing cardiac causes of dyspnoea in a patient with known pulmonary sarcoidosis given the rarity of cardiac involvement. We review proposed diagnostic criteria for cardiac sarcoidosis using enhanced imaging techniques without requiring invasive myocardial biopsy. This case discussion also highlights nuances in managing cardiac sarcoidosis based on the best available evidence and expert consensus.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| 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".