The Prevalence and Predictors of Atherosclerotic Coronary Artery Disease in Rheumatic and Non-rheumatic Valvular Heart Disease Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The paradox of concurrent coronary artery disease (CAD) among patients with rheumatic and non-rheumatic valvular heart disease (RVHD; non-RVHD) is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the impact of the RVHD and non-RVHD on the prevalence of CAD and various risk factors, assess the number of diseased coronaries, clinical profile and the possible predictors of CAD in these patients, which may clarify the paradox and provide an insight for the prevention of CAD. METHODS: The records of 106 valvular heart disease patients who had undergone valve replacement surgery at the King Faisal Cardiac Centre from January 2014 to October 2019 were evaluated. The clinical data and established risk factors were compared and logistic regression analyses were performed to identify plausible predictors of CAD. RESULTS: < 0.01), and 63 had non-RVHD (60.0 ± 12 years). Of these, 31 patients showed the highest CAD (49.2%). Single- and triple-vessel disease was most common in RVHD and non-RVHD patients with concurrent CAD (33.3%; 41.9%, respectively), while non-RVHD patients also had quadruple vessel disease. The mean age of the RVHD and non-RVHD patients with coexisting CAD was significantly higher (66.7 ± 5; 66.7 ± 8 years) than those without CAD (46.1 ± 12.0; 54.7 ± 20, respectively). RVHD patients showed a significantly lower prevalence of diabetes, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, inflammatory cells, hepatorenal function markers, ejection fraction, and regional wall motion abnormality compared to RVHD patients with coexisting CAD (p < 0.01). Bivariate analysis indicated white blood cells, monocytes, neutrophils, gamma-glutamyl-transferase (GGT), bilirubin and blood urea nitrogen (BUN) to be significantly lower in RVHD patients. Predictors of high risk of CAD were BUN and hyperlipidaemia for RVHD and BUN, creatinine and GGT for non-RVHD patients. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of CAD in Saudi RVHD patients was significantly lower than in the Western countries, whereas non-RVHD was higher. The low prevalence may partly be attributed to age, reduced mitral regurgitation, and low frequency of risk and inflammatory factors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".