MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409251593 · doi:10.1055/a-2558-4266

Aorta Wall Stress during Exercise in Patients with an Ascending Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm: Insights from a Case Series

2024· article· en· W4409251593 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAorta · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsAscending aortaMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineThoracic aortaDescending aortaAerobic exerciseAortaThoracic aortic aneurysmAneurysmAortic aneurysmSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Individuals with ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm (ATAA) are recommended to avoid intense exercise for fear of marked increases in aortic wall stress (AWS). However, no study has measured AWS during exercise. The aim of this case series was to examine AWS during “light-to-moderate” aerobic exercise in individuals with ATAA and healthy control (CON) participants. Three clinically stable patients with ATAA (2 male, mean age: 74 ± 1 years) and 3 CON (2 male, mean age: 69 ± 7 years) were studied on 2 separate days. Day 1: a maximal cardiopulmonary exercise test was performed to measure peak aerobic power (VO2peak), maximal heart rate, and blood pressure (BP). Day 2: cardiac and aortic magnetic resonance imaging were performed at rest and during submaximal (3–5 metabolic equivalents) “stepper” exercise during which cardiac output (Qc), aorta diameters, wall thickness, and BP were measured. Circumferential ascending and descending AWS were calculated in accord with LaPlace Law, whereas aorta mechanical efficiency was derived as the AWS/Qc slope. Patients with ATAA demonstrated lower median VO2peak (18.2 vs. 24.1 mL/kg/min). During exercise, the absolute ascending (ATAA: 257 vs. CON: 269 kPa) and descending AWS increased (ATAA: 224 vs. CON: 207 kPa), and ∆AWS during exercise was similar between ATAA and CON (Ascending, ATAA: 79 vs. CON: 62 kPa; Descending, ATAA: 64 vs. CON: 55 kPa). During exercise, ascending and descending AWS were 76 to 83% below ATAA rupture thresholds (i.e., 800–1,200 kPa) in all patients. Finally, exercise Qc was 17% lower and the ascending AWS/Qc slope was 30% higher in ATAA (16 kPa/L/min) versus CON (12 kPa/L/min). Our findings demonstrate “light-to-moderate” aerobic exercise produces similar AWS responses between ATAA and CON and is well below aneurysmal rupture thresholds. The higher AWS/Qc slope in ATAA suggests decreased aortic mechanical efficiency and may be a useful measure for exercise prescription for these patients.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.892

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.252 · 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