MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413409044 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jeaf250

Associations and prognostic implications of myocardial tissue injury stages in ST-elevation myocardial infarction using the Canadian Cardiovascular Society classification

2025· article· en· W4413409044 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ivan Lechner, Jaclyn Carberry, Thomas Stiermaier, Christina Tiller, Magdalena Holzknecht, Fritz Oberhollenzer, Alex Kaser, Johannes Mair, Agnes Mayr, Hans‐Josef Feistritzer, David Carrick, Clemens Dlaska, Axel Bauer, Hölger Thiele, Ingo Eitel, Bernhard Metzler, Colin Berry, Martin Reindl, Sebastian J. Reinstadler

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLandes TirolsAustrian Science FundBritish Heart FoundationÖsterreichische Kardiologische GesellschaftEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMaceMedicineInterquartile rangeMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineCardiologyStage (stratigraphy)Proportional hazards modelBiomarkerClinical significanceProspective cohort studyPercutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: The recently proposed Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) classification categorizes post-infarction tissue injury into four stages, potentially improving risk stratification and guiding cardioprotective strategies. Its clinical and prognostic relevance in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains unclear. We aimed to compare clinical characteristics across CCS stages and validate their prognostic implications in STEMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed 1109 STEMI patients included in three prospective studies. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging was performed 3 (interquartile range 2-5) days after myocardial infarction (MI) and patients were classified as follows: Stage 1 (aborted MI), Stage 2 (MI with necrosis and absence of microvascular injury), Stage 3 (MI with necrosis and microvascular obstruction), and Stage 4 (MI with necrosis and intramyocardial haemorrhage). This analysis revealed distinct patterns of clinical presentation, biomarker profiles, and cardiac function across the different CCS stages. There were differences in adverse clinical event rates and mortality between CCS stages [major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE): 0.7%, 3.4%, 3.1%, and 15.7%, P < 0.001 and mortality: 0.7%, 1.7%, 0.9%, and 6.3%, P < 0.001]. The CCS stage had a moderate to good predictive value for MACE and mortality [area under the curve (AUC) 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68-0.80), P < 0.001 and AUC 0.71 (95% CI: 0.61-0.80), P < 0.001] at 12 months, respectively. CCS stages were independently associated with MACE in multivariable Cox regression [hazard ratio: 2.18 (95% CI: 1.70-2.78), P < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: This study describes clinical characteristics across CCS stages and provides insights into their prognostic implications in a large cohort of STEMI patients reperfused by percutaneous coronary intervention. These data should inform the use of CCS stages in future trial designs.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular ImagingSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207