Oscillatory shear stress is elevated in patients with bicuspid aortic valve and aortic regurgitation: a 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and aortic regurgitation have higher rate of aortic complications compared with patients with BAV and stenosis, as well as BAV without valvular disease. Aortic regurgitation alters blood haemodynamics not only in systole but also during diastole. We therefore sought to investigate wall shear stress (WSS) during the whole cardiac cycle in BAV with aortic regurgitation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fifty-seven subjects that underwent 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging were included: 13 patients with BAVs without valve disease, 14 BAVs with aortic regurgitation, 15 BAVs with aortic stenosis, and 22 normal controls with tricuspid aortic valve. Peak and time averaged WSS in systole and diastole and the oscillatory shear index (OSI) in the ascending aorta were computed. Student's t-tests were used to compare values between the four groups where the data were normally distributed, and the non-parametric Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used otherwise. BAVs with regurgitation had similar peak and time averaged WSS compared with the patients with BAV without valve disease and with stenosis, and no regions of elevated WSS were found. BAV with aortic regurgitation had twice as high OSI as the other groups (P ≤ 0.001), and mainly in the outer mid-to-distal ascending aorta. CONCLUSION: OSI uniquely characterizes altered WSS patterns in BAVs with aortic regurgitation, and thus could be a haemodynamic marker specific for this specific group that is at higher risk of aortic complications. Future longitudinal studies are needed to verify this hypothesis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".