Microvascular Dysfunction as a Possible Link Between Heart Failure and Cognitive Dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Microvascular function in the brain and heart may play an important role in the course of patients with heart failure (HF), but its relationship with ventricular and cognitive function is not well understood. We hypothesized that microvascular function in HF is closely related to both, cardiac and cognitive function. METHODS: In healthy controls and symptomatic patients with HF (New York Heart Association functional class II or III), we used oxygenation-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging during a standardized breathing maneuver to determine the cerebral oxygenation reserve and the myocardial oxygenation reserve (MORE) as markers for microvascular function. A stepwise multivariable linear regression was performed to determine the variables that best predict changes in cerebral oxygenation reserve and MORE. We also measured cognitive function using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test. RESULTS: Twenty patients with HF (age 64.4±8.3 years; 50% female sex), and 21 healthy controls (age 55.0±5.1 years; 62% female sex) were included in the analysis. In patients with HF, cerebral oxygenation reserve and MORE were lower than in healthy controls (MORE, −0.1±3.3 versus 5.0±4.2, cerebral oxygenation reserve: 0.43±0.47 versus 1.21±0.60, respectively) as were Montreal Cognitive Assessment score results (HF, 23.9±3.7; healthy, 27.8±1.5; P =0.002). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment score in patients was correlated with cardiac output ( r =0.55, P =0.011) and MORE ( r =0.46, P =0.040). In addition to the presence of HF, significant predictors of cerebral and myocardial oxygenation reserve were cardiac output and end-diastolic volume, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that heart failure is an independent predictor of coronary and cerebral microvascular dysfunction as defined by a reduced response to a vasodilatory breathing maneuver. This impaired response was associated with reduced cognitive function.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".