An atypical case of infective endocarditis initially diagnosed as myopericarditis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Acute myopericarditis is inflammation of the pericardium, or the membrane surrounding the heart, and the myocardium, or the muscular myocardial layer of the heart. Infective endocarditis is an infection of the cardiac endothelium. Diagnosis relies on clinical evaluation, blood cultures to identify the causative organism, and echocardiography to visualize vegetations on heart valves. In the emergency department (ED), distinguishing between myopericarditis and infective endocarditis is crucial to avoid misdiagnosis. Case report: We present the case of a 36-year-old male who was initially hospitalized for myocarditis and discharged on medications with cardiology follow-up planned. Twelve days later, the patient was readmitted with recurring chest pain. A bedside cardiac ultrasound showed mild mitral regurgitation. The patient was found to have bacteremia with Streptococcus anginosus which was concerning for endocarditis. The patient was transferred to a quaternary care hospital, where he underwent successful mitral valve repair. Why should an emergency physician be aware of this?: In the ED setting, it is crucial to broaden differential diagnoses. Myopericarditis can sometimes result from endocarditis, which can present in various ways. Therefore, endocarditis should be ruled out in acute presentations of chest pain. To avoid missing cases of endocarditis, obtaining blood cultures from patients with myopericarditis symptoms is essential. Additionally, expediting a transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) can lead to a faster and more accurate diagnosis. Promptly conducting these tests can reduce the number of missed endocarditis cases and prevent patients from returning to the emergency department.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".