MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 4141995: Impact of myocardial infarction on aortic and mitral bioprosthetic valve degeneration

2024· article· en· W4404360222 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dounia Rouabhia, Florence Desroches, Amélie Paquin, Siamak Mohammadi, Marie‐Annick Clavel, Philippe Pibarot, Jonathan Beaudoin

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionDegeneration (medical)Mitral valveAortic valvePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Studies have previously suggested that myocardial infarction (MI) have an impact on native aortic valve stenosis progression as well as inducing pathobiological changes in native mitral and tricuspid native valve leaflets. Inflammation, renal failure, and hypertension have been identified as potential factors accelerating structural valve degeneration (SVD). However, the impact of MI on bioprosthetic valve and SVD is unknown. Hypothesis: MI accelerates the progression of bioprosthetic valve degeneration. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of patients who underwent a bioprosthetic aortic or mitral valve replacement at Quebec Heart and lung Institute was done. Patients were identified through a keyword search in institutional medical records and through the local cardiac surgical database (n = 158). Inclusion required a bioprosthetic valve in aortic (n = 146) or mitral (n = 12) position, with or without history of MI after surgery and at least two echocardiograms within 5 years post-MI, along with available echocardiograms performed ≥6 months prior to the MI. Patients were matched for baseline and prosthetic valve characteristics and divided into two groups 1) No MI (controls, n= 79), 2) MI (cases, n= 79). Echocardiograms were reviewed for valve mean and maximal gradient as well as valve area derived from the continuity equation. Results: At baseline, the two matched groups had comparable characteristics and echocardiographic data. The annualized progression of prosthetic valve area was higher in the MI group (-0.04 ± 0.16 cm 2 /y vs 0.00 ± 0.11, p = 0.039). This was mostly driven by patients with aortic valve replacement (aortic valve area -0.05 ± 0.14 cm 2 /y vs 0.01 ± 0.11, p = 0.0077). Using a mixed linear model, the presence of MI had a significant interaction with the decline of aortic valve area and indexed aortic valve area (p = 0.0057, p = 0.0041). There was no difference in mean or maximal gradient between the two matched group. Annual progression rate of indexed bioprosthetic aortic valve area was faster in men compared to women in the whole population (-0.061 ± 0.01 cm 2 /m 2/ y vs -0.01 ± 0.02 cm 2 /m 2/ y for men and women, respectively; p = 0.009). Conclusion: This study suggests that bioprosthetic valve stenosis may be accelerated following a myocardial infarction. These findings could be explained by the same fibrotic mechanisms observed in native valves. More studies are needed to understand the underlying mechanisms and clinical impact.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→