MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 18388: Novel Study of the Dynamic Changes in Mitral Valve Annular and Leaflet Parameters Under Varying Loading Conditions: A Three-Dimensional Echocardiographic Study

2013· article· en· W4395039810 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Alhabdan, Timothy Colen, Berthold Klas, Edythe Tham, Lisa K. Hornberger, Jeffrey Smallhorn, Nee Scze Khoo

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLeaflet (botany)CardiologyMitral valveInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The impact of changing loading conditions on mitral valve (MV) coaptation is controversial. Previous studies assessed the MV at mid or end-systole only, hence MV dynamic changes throughout systole are poorly understood. We used three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) to explore dynamic changes in MV annular and leaflet parameters during loading stress and inotropy in an animal model. Methods: In open chest model, 8 pigs and 4 dogs were imaged epicardially. 3DE was performed at baseline, with dobutamine infusion, volume infusion and aortic constriction, with a return to baseline hemodynamics between each intervention. The 3DE datasets were analyzed offline using TomTec semi automated MV software. Leaflet (AL) and annular area (AA) were reported as % change from baseline in 5 systolic intervals (1-5; each representing 20% of systole). ANOVA was performed between each intervention and baseline, at the 5 intervals, with Dunnett’s correction. Results: At baseline, MV peak % change of AL and AA occurred during the 4th and 5th intervals respectively. Compared to baseline, dobutamine infusion % change AL was reduced (-5.9% ± 3.8 vs -9.4% ± 6.1, p<0.01) in the 3rd interval, whilst % change AA was reduced throughout systole. With volume loading, % change AL and AA were significantly reduced during intervals 2 to 5. In contrast, with aortic constriction % change AL (-5.9% ± 3.8 vs -2.4% ± 4.8, p<0.05) and %change AA (-1.6% ± 3.8 vs 1.5% ± 5.7, p<0.05) were increased at the 3rd interval (see Figure). Conclusion: Peak MV annular contraction and leaflet apposition occurs in late systole. MV leaflet coaptation area improves in response to increased contractility and pre-load by increasing annular contraction and reducing unopposed leaflet surface. In contrast, increased afterload has the opposite effect on annular and leaflet size, potentially worsening coaptation. The timing of peak annular contraction and leaflet apposition has implications for the design of future MV studies.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors→French-language works237,207→