Invasive hemodynamic response to exercise in hemodynamically significant aortic stenosis with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Guidelines acknowledge that discordant low-gradient (LG) aortic stenosis (AS) may be severe, but verifying this can be challenging. Right heart catheterization during exercise is considered the gold standard evaluating ventricular hemodynamics. No invasive studies have compared the hemodynamic response of discordant LG and severe AS during exercise. Purpose To describe exercise hemodynamics in patients with asymptomatic discordant AS and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50%, and to identify the variables associated with the steepness of the pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP)/cardiac output (CO) slope defined as (peak exercise PCWP-rest PCWP)/(peak exercise CO-rest CO). Methods Patients with aortic valve area (AVA) ≤1.5 cm² underwent right heart catheterization at rest and during maximal exercise measuring pulmonary artery pressures, PCWP, CO and PCWP/CO slope. Patients were stratified in three groups: 1) discordant LG AS (AVA ≤1.0 cm² and mean gradient <40 mmHg); 2) moderate AS (AVA >1.0 cm²) and 3) high-gradient severe AS (AVA ≤1.0 cm² and mean gradient ≥40 mmHg). Results Among 86 patients, 17 (20%) had discordant LG, 49 (57%) moderate, and 20 (23%) high-gradient severe AS. The PCWP/CO slope was significantly steeper in discordant LG: median 3.3 mmHg/L/min (interquartile range: 2.2 mmHg/L/min) and high-gradient severe AS: 2.7 mmHg/L/min (1.5 mmHg/L/min) compared to moderate AS: 1.9 mmHg/L/min (2.0 mmHg/L/min), p=0.004. In a linear regression model adjusted for age, sex and rest PCWP, systemic arterial compliance and AS severity were significantly associated with the PCWP/CO slope. Furthermore, patients with discordant LG AS had a leftward and upward shift in the PCWP/CO slope. Conclusions Discordant LG and high-gradient severe AS had similar hemodynamic response to exercise with steeper PCWP/CO slope than in moderate AS, suggesting that discordant LG AS is a severe form of AS. In addition, the left-upward shift in PCWP/CO slope for discordant LG compared to high-gradient severe AS indicates that, this group also has latent heart failure with preserved ejection fraction physiology.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".