MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Comprehensive stress echocardiography uncovers the heterogenity of phenotypes in non-ischemic heart failure with abnormal ejection fraction

2024· article· en· W4403806194 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Kalakauskaitė, Gintare Karaliute, L Balkeviciene, Jelena Čelutkienė, Quirino Ciampi, Lauro Cortigiani, K Wierzsbowka-Drabik, A Zagatina, A Djordjevic-Dikic, F Manganelli, A Boshchenko, C Borguezan-Daros, Rosina Arbucci, Patricia A. Pellikka, Eugenio Picano

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsCytodiagnostics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionCardiologyInternal medicineHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Heart failure (HF) with abnormal left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) manifests in multiple phenotypes, each presenting distinct and potentially actionable therapeutic targets. This study aimed to assess the potential of the ABCDE+ stress echocardiography (SE) protocol in uncovering different phenotypes of non-ischemic HF. Methods With a retrospective analysis of prospectively acquired data, we identified 265 patients (mean age: 65.7±12.6 years; 154 males, 59.9%) with non-ischemic HF with EF<50% (mean =41.4±7.5) enrolled by 23 certified laboratories between 2021 and 2023. Ischemic origin was excluded based on data of angiography and medical history. ABCDE-SE was evaluated with exercise (n=98, 37.0%), dobutamine (n=50, 18.9%), or vasodilators (n=117, 44.1%). The protocol consisted of several steps: A assessed regional wall motion abnormality (RWMA); B evaluated number of B-lines; C measured left ventricular contractile reserve; Step D with coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR) in the left anterior descending artery (LAD) was completed in 102 patients (38.5%); step E assessed heart rate reserve. Additionally, step F (evaluated in 188 patients at rest and 107 at peak stress) noted the presence of rest or stress-induced moderate-to-severe secondary mitral regurgitation. The SE response was graded on a scale from 0 (all steps normal) to 5 (all ABCDE+ steps abnormal). Results The mean ABCDE score was 1.5±1.2, ranging from 0 (n=59, 22.3%) to 5 (n=2, 0.8%) (see distribution of scores in Figure 1A). Abnormal results were observed in 21 subjects (7.9%) for A, 86 (32.5 %) for B, 147 (55.5%) for C, 42/102 (41.2%) for D, and 101 (38.1%) for E steps. Step F was abnormal in 22/188 (11.8%) at rest and in 16/107 (14.9%) at peak stress. The predominant "solitary phenotypes" (only one step abnormal) were impaired LV contractile function phenotype (step C in 47, 51.1%) followed by chronotropic insufficiency (step E in 17, 18.5%) and congestive phenotype (step B in 17, 18.5%) (see Figure 1B). The most frequent combined phenotype was BCE – congestive phenotype with impaired ventricular and heart rate reserves (28 [62.2%]). Notably, 38 patients (14.3%) demonstrated improved regional contractility, while 27 patients (10.2%) showed new regional wall motion abnormality (see Table). Conclusion Non-ischemic HF patients with abnormal EF exhibit a broad spectrum of phenotypes. Impaired left ventricular contractility, interstitial congestion, and chronotropic insufficiency are the most frequent abnormalities detected by ABCDE-SE. Up to one-quarter of such patients demonstrate normal SE results. This comprehensive approach paves the way for personalized, SE-guided therapy.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors→French-language works237,207→