Right Ventricular Systolic Pressure Trajectory as a Predictor of Hospitalization and Mortality in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Pulmonary hypertension is common among patients with heart failure (HF). Right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) is frequently used to assess its presence and severity. Although RVSP has been associated with adverse outcomes, the importance of serial measurements has not been studied. We evaluated associations between serial RVSP measurements and cardiovascular events in patients with HF. Methods: Patients with HF and 2 echocardiograms performed ≥ 6 months apart were included. RVSP was categorized, using the second echocardiogram, as follows: normal (< 40 mm Hg); severely elevated (≥ 60 mm Hg); moderately elevated (50-59 mm Hg); or mildly elevated (40-49 mm Hg). Patients also were classified according to change in RVSP categories between echocardiograms. The primary outcome was time to HF hospitalization (HFH) or all-cause mortality (ACM) after the second echocardiogram. Results: In total, 4319 patients were included (median age: 78 years; 52.1% female). During a median follow-up period of 19.4 months, HFH/ACM occurred in 2714 patients (62.8%). In multivariable analysis, baseline RSVP that was mildly elevated (1069 patients, hazard ratio [HR] 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.54), moderately elevated (797 patients, HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.30-1.82), or severely elevated (837 patients, HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.60-2.31) was independently associated with HFH/ACM. Additionally, improving RVSP was associated with increased HFH/ACM in both categorical (HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.01-1.33) and continuous analyses. Conclusions: RVSP measurements identify patients at increased risk who may require more-aggressive monitoring and medical therapy. Our study raises the hypothesis that, in addition to the absolute value of RVSP, improving RVSP category may identify higher-risk patients, but further study is needed to elucidate the underlying reasons.
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".