Cardiac sarcoidosis with extensive and heterogeneous left ventricular FDG uptake in absence of guidelines indication for an implantable defibrillator: Ventricular tachycardia precipitated by immunosuppressive therapy, should we have done differently?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 40-year-old man, newly diagnosed with cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) presented with symptomatic ventricular tachycardia three days after starting steroid-based immunosuppressive therapy (IT). There was no clear guideline indication for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) before the initiation of IT. Shortly after ICD implantation and the initiation of anti-arrhythmic drugs, recurring ventricular arrhythmias required titration of the anti-arrhythmic drug therapy. One-year follow-up assessment showed no significant arrhythmias and complete PET scan FDG uptake suppression. This case, along with recent publications, suggests transient pro-arrhythmic effects of steroids in patients with CS, which are not appropriately addressed in the current guidelines. We believe ICD implantation should be considered in clinically manifest CS before initiating IT, particularly in cases with heterogeneous and/or extensive FDG uptake on PET scans.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".