MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Skeletal Muscle Oxidative Capacity And Muscle Fat Content In Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

2023· article· en· W4387062785 on OpenAlexaff
Miles F. Bartlett, Alberto Palmero Canton, Manall Jaffery, Julissa Mireles, Garen K. Anderson, Satyam Sarma, James P. MacNamara, Mark J. Haykowsky, Benjamin D. Levine, Vlad G. Zaha, Jimin Ren, Michael D. Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeart failure with preserved ejection fractionMedicineCardiologyHeart failureInternal medicineEjection fractionExercise intolerancePhosphocreatineStroke volumeVO2 maxSkeletal muscleMagnetic resonance imagingCardiac outputHeart rateHemodynamicsBlood pressureEnergy metabolism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE Exercise intolerance is the hallmark symptom of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the most common form of heart failure among older individuals. Initially considered to be a central limitation (i.e. abnormal left ventricular relaxation and impaired cardiac output), emerging evidence supports a peripheral limitation to exercise. However, direct evaluation of the quadriceps (the primary locomotor muscle group) remains limited. METHODS HFpEF patients (n = 23, 12F, 68.1 ± 6.4 yrs) and age-matched controls (n = 23, 14F, 69.2 ± 6.6 yrs) completed: 1) an incremental cycle test to assess VO2max, 2) T2- magnetic resonance imaging to quantify thigh muscle volume and fat content, and 3) 31P magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the quadriceps to quantify muscle oxidative capacity; measured as the Tau (τ) of phosphocreatine recovery (τPCr) immediately following knee extension exercise. Whole-body arterial-venous oxygen difference and cardiac output were also measured in HFpEF patients (but not controls) to further sub-divide HFpEF patients as being centrally- (Type A) versus peripherally-limited (Type-B). RESULTS HFpEF had greater body mass (p = 0.001) and BMI (p = 0.001) than Controls, and a lower VO2max when normalized to body mass (14.3 ± 4.5 vs 18.9 ± 4.6 ml/kg/min; p = 0.006), but no differences were observed for VO2max normalized to leg lean mass (899.5 ± 168.3 vs 982.8 ± 164.1 ml/kg/min; p = 0.096), τPCr (57.1 ± 11.8 vs 54.4 ± 14.9 s; p = 0.518), or muscle- (22.5 ± 7.0 vs 19.9 ± 4.0 %; p = 0.127) and thigh-fat percentages (56.1 ± 16.0 vs 51.4 ± 12.4 %; p = 0.287). After separating Type-A (n = 8, 1F) and Type-B (n = 15, 11F) HFpEF patients, VO2max normalized to leg mass (main effect p = 0.115) and τPCr (main effect p = 0.481) were still not different between groups, but Type-B HFpEF patients did exhibit greater muscle- (24.9 ± 7.0 %) and thigh-fat (62.3 ± 13.7 %) percentages than Type-A HFpEF patients (18.1 ± 4.6 and 44.5 ± 14.0 %; p < 0.015) and Controls (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION The results of the present study do not support impairments in intrinsic skeletal muscle oxidative capacity as a major source of exercise intolerance in HFpEF but highlight potentially important roles for differences in skeletal muscle- and thigh-fat content. This study was funded by the National Institutes of Health (P01 HL137630).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors→French-language works237,207→