Abstract 4134687: Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy Complicating Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There have been studies suggesting Takotsubo cardiomyopathy (TCM) as a potential complication following cerebrovascular accident (CVA), but the association, contributing factors, and prognosis significance have not been well-characterized. Aims: 1) To assess the incidence, factors and prognosis associated with TCM-complicated CVA, and 2) to determine the 30-day unplanned readmission rates for TCM after discharge for CVA and the associated factors. Methods: The U.S. Nationwide Readmission Database was queried using ICD-codes to gather information on discharges with primary diagnosis of CVA between January 2010 and November 2020. Incidence and factors associated with TCM-complicated CVA and 30-day readmissions with primary diagnosis of TCM were assessed. Results: Of 3,696,202 patients hospitalized with primary diagnosis of CVA, 5,526 (0.15%) individuals developed TCM during the admission. Patients with TCM were more likely to be women (80% vs. 52%, P<0.001), present with hemorrhagic (as opposed to ischemic stroke, P<0.001), and have a higher comorbidity burden, adverse events, and longer hospital stay. Mortality rate was significantly higher among those with TCM vs no-TCM (20% vs. 6.4%, P<0.001). Of 3,690,676 patients who were discharged without experiencing TCM during index admission for CVA, 255,947 (6.9%) patients had unplanned readmissions within 30 days of discharge, and 250 (0.1%) of these were with a primary diagnosis of TCM. These individuals with TCM were more likely to be women (78% vs. 51%, P<0.001), had a higher comorbidity burden, and experienced higher mortality rate during readmission compared to those without TCM (12% vs. 5.7%, P=0.009). Conclusions: Although rare, a TCM-complicated CVA can be highly fatal. Female sex, presentation with hemorrhagic stroke and pre-existing health conditions were strong factors associated with TCM-complicated CVA. Readmission for TCM after discharge for CVA is also uncommon but carries a significantly elevated risk of mortality. Our study presents an opportunity to improve processes and clinical outcomes by monitoring and recognizing TCM post-CVA, both during and after hospitalization.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".