MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401330562 · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2024.05.050

Myocardial Strain Measured by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Predicts Cardiovascular Morbidity and Death

2024· article· en· W4401330562 on OpenAlexaff
Sucharitha Chadalavada, Kenneth Fung, Elisa Rauseo, Aaron M. Lee, Mohammed Y Khanji, Alborz Amir-Khalili, José Miguel Paiva, Hafiz Naderi, Shantanu Banik, Mihaela Chirvasa, Magnus T. Jensen, Nay Aung, Steffen E. Petersen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Cardiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsCircle Cardiovascular Imaging
FundersBarts Health NHS TrustNovo Nordisk FondenBritish Heart FoundationEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchMedical Research CouncilBarts CharityUK Research and InnovationQueen Mary University of London
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineCardiologyHeart failureStroke (engine)PopulationCardiac magnetic resonance imagingMagnetic resonance imagingStroke volumeCardiac magnetic resonanceProportional hazards modelMyocardial infarction diagnosisEjection fractionRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Myocardial strain using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is a sensitive marker for predicting adverse outcomes in many cardiac disease states, but the prognostic value in the general population has not been studied conclusively. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to assess the independent prognostic value of CMR feature tracking (FT)-derived LV global longitudinal (GLS), circumferential (GCS), and radial strain (GRS) metrics in predicting adverse outcomes (heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and death). METHODS: Participants from the UK Biobank population imaging study were included. Univariable and multivariable Cox models were used for each outcome and each strain marker (GLS, GCS, GRS) separately. The multivariable models were tested with adjustment for prognostically important clinical features and conventional global LV imaging markers relevant for each outcome. RESULTS: Overall, 45,700 participants were included in the study (average age 65 ± 8 years), with a median follow-up period of 3 years. All univariable and multivariable models demonstrated that lower absolute GLS, GCS, and GRS were associated with increased incidence of heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and death. All strain markers were independent predictors (incrementally above some respective conventional LV imaging markers) for the morbidity outcomes, but only GLS predicted death independently: (HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.07-1.30). CONCLUSIONS: In the general population, LV strain metrics derived using CMR-FT in radial, circumferential, and longitudinal directions are strongly and independently predictive of heart failure, myocardial infarction, and stroke, but only GLS is independently predictive of death in an adult population cohort.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
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 teacher head, 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

Citations42
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American College of CardiologySame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207