Direct synchronized cardioversion not independently associated with infarcts on cerebral magnetic resonance imaging and clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Direct synchronized cardioversion (DCV) is frequently performed in atrial fibrillation (AF). In general, DCV is considered a safe procedure. A rare, but feared complication following DCV is an overt ischemic stroke resulting from embolization of a left atrial clot to the cerebral circulation. Purpose The aim of the present study was to assess the association of DCV with infarcts on brain magnetic resonance imaging (bMRI) and clinical outcomes. Methods 2386 patients of the Swiss AF cohort were included. 1731 patients were evaluated by bMRI. DCVs were recorded by questionnaire. Patients were categorized by number of DCVs performed before enrollment (0,1,≥2). BMRI were conducted at baseline and after 2 years (n=1227) and analyzed for large noncortical or cortical infarcts (LNCCI) and small noncortical infarcts (SNCI). Clinical outcomes were recorded during follow-up. Associations of DCV and outcome-measures were assessed by multivariate analyses. Results There was no independent association between the number of DCV and infarct prevalence (LNCCI + SNCI) on baseline bMRI (DCV 1 vs. 0: OR 0.95 [95% CI 0.73-1.26]; DCV ≥2 vs. 0: OR 1.04 [0.73-1.51]) or between DCV performed during follow-up and new infarcts on bMRI at 2 years (OR 1.46 [0.54-3.31]). DCVs were not associated with overt stroke or transient ischemic attack (DCV 1 vs. 0: HR 1.35 [0.87-2.03]; DCV ≥2 vs. 0: HR 1.54 [0.95-2.49]), hospitalization for heart failure (DCV 1 vs. 0: HR 1.03 [0.80-1.33]; DCV ≥2 vs. 0: HR 1.03 [0.77-1.37]), or death (DCV 1 vs. 0: HR 0.85 [0.67-1.09]; DCV ≥2 vs. 0: HR 0.92 [0.70-1.22]). Conclusions There was no association between DCV performed before enrollment and cerebral infarcts on baseline bMRI or between DCV performed during follow-up and new infarcts at 2 years. Moreover, DCV were not associated with clinical events.
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 | 0.000 | 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".