MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412813822 · doi:10.21037/qims-2024-2822

Quantitative assessment of hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy with intraoperative three-dimensional epicardial and transesophageal echocardiography

2025· article· en· W4412813822 on OpenAlexaff
Mireia Pozo Albiol, Azad Mashari, Ricard Navarro‐Ripoll, Anthony Ralph‐Edwards, Ella Huszti, Qixuan Li, Jacobo Moreno Garijo

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypertrophic cardiomyopathyMedicineCardiologyObstructive cardiomyopathyInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM), a subset of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), is characterized by dynamic left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction, often caused by systolic anterior motion (SAM) of the mitral valve and septal hypertrophy. Accurate intraoperative assessment of septal morphology, SAM distance, and LVOT area (LVOTa) is critical for surgical planning during septal myectomy. While transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), particularly with three-dimensional (3D) imaging, is the standard modality for evaluating these parameters, it may be contraindicated or suboptimal in select cases. Real-time 3D epicardial echocardiography (EE) offers an alternative imaging approach that allows direct visualization of the heart intraoperatively without esophageal instrumentation. This study investigates the utility of 3D EE compared to 3D TEE for quantitative assessment of septal left ventricular wall thickness (LVWT), SAM distance, and LVOTa in HOCM patients undergoing myectomy. The primary aim is to assess whether 3D EE and TEE measurements correlate and can be used interchangeably. A secondary aim is to compare 2D and 3D measurements by both modalities. Methods: Perioperative data of 59 patients with HOCM were obtained by retrospective review in a tertiary care setting. 2D and 3D intraoperative transesophageal and EE studies were assessed performing multiple measurements relevant for myectomy. Demographic and clinical data were summarized with descriptive statistics, while the Altman-Bland method assessed the interchangeability of three-dimensional transesophageal and EE measurements. Inter- and intraobserver variabilities were evaluated using the Bland-Altman method and intraclass correlation coefficient. Results: Off-line analysis of 3D data sets with Qlab Phillips was feasible in 79.7% of the patients. No significant differences were found between epicardial and transesophageal echocardiographic intraoperative measurements by 2D: septal LVWT (P=0.59), SAM distance (P=0.40) or LVOTa (P=0.22), or by 3D: septal LVWT (P=0.42), SAM distance (P=0.23) or LVOTa (P=0.38). Conclusions: Intraoperative EE demonstrates equal potential utility in guiding HOCM patients when TEE is not an option or is contraindicated. These findings underscore the clinical significance of EE as a reliable alternative for image guidance during myectomy in HOCM patients, contributing to improved surgical outcomes.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.874

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuantitative Imaging in Medicine and SurgerySame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207