MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 15165: Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography in Patients With Low Flow, Low Gradient Aortic Stenosis and Preserved Lvef

2022· article· en· W4380785700 on OpenAlexaff
Nils Sofus Borg Mogensen, Rasmus Carter‐Storch, Mohamed‐Salah Annabi, Jasmine Grenier-Delaney, Jacob Eifer Møller, Kristian Altern Øvrehus, Philippe Pîbarot, Marie‐Annick Clavel, Jordi S. Dahl

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstituteInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionCardiologyInternal medicineDobutamineStenosisStroke volumeHeart failureHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Guidelines recommend the use of Dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) in case of low flow low gradient aortic stenosis (LFLG AS) when left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50%, but few data support this threshold as most studies have tested DSE when LVEF <35%. Hypothesis: To examine the feasibility of DSE in patients with LFLG AS, and the possible interaction between LVEF and accuracy of projected aortic valve area (AVA proj ) in correctly classifying severe AS defined by Cardiac Computer Tomography (C-CT). Methods: Patients with LFLG AS (aortic mean gradient <40 mmHg & AVA <1.0 cm 2 & stroke volume index (SV i ) <35ml/m 2 ) undergoing DSE were identified from two prospective cohorts, and stratified according to LVEF (<35%, 35-50% and >50%). Severe AS was defined as AVC score ≥2000 AU in males, and ≥1200 AU in females on C-CT. Results: Of 214 patients, 65 (30%) presented with LVEF <35%, 58 (27%) with LVEF 35-50%, and 91 (43%) with LVEF >50%. 97 patients presented with severe AS (32 vs 21 vs 44, p=0.26). An inverse relationship was seen between LVEF and left ventricular diameter (60±10mm vs 54±7mm vs 47±6mm, p<0.01). Although resting SV i was different between groups (26.4±6.4mL vs 27.3±5.6 vs 29.6±5.7, p<0.01), no significant differences in SV i change was seen during DSE (7.3±5.9mL vs 5.5±6.2mL vs 6.7±6.7mL, p=0.30), and patients with LVEF <35% were more likely to demonstrate flow-reserve, defined as an increase in SVi >20%; 39 (63%) vs 21 (36%) vs 44 (49%), p=0.01. AVA proj provided similar AUCs (p=0.31) (Figure 1) and cut-off points in classifying severe AS across LVEF groups: LVEF<35%: 1.02 cm 2 /accuracy 74%, vs LVEF 35-50%: 0.82cm 2 /accuracy 72% vs LVEF >50%: 0.9cm 2 /accuracy 65%. Conclusion: DSE leads to similar increases in stroke volume index (SV i ) in patients with LVEF >50% compared with LVEF ≤50%. Furthermore, the projected aortic valve area (AVA proj ) provides good accuracy for identification of true-severe AS, regardless of LVEF stratum.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→