MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 8559: Efficacy of Implantable Cardiac Defibrillators for the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death in Patients with Cardiac Sarcoidosis

2011· article· en· W69504822 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jordana Kron, Frank Bogun, Thomas Crawford, Sinan Sarsam, Davendra Mehta, Arnold J. Greenspon, Matthew Ortman, David B. DeLurgio, Ravinder Valadri, Calambur Narasimhan, Nalla Swapna, Jagmeet P. Singh, Stephan B. Danik, David G. Benditt, Adrian K. Almquist, Andrew D. Krahn, Joshua M. Cooper, Steven M. Markowitz, Jacquelene Morales, Luke G. Wolfe, Shawn Feinstein, Kenneth A. Ellenbogen

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSudden cardiac deathCardiac sarcoidosisCardiologyInternal medicineDefibrillationSarcoidosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Patients with cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) are at increased risk for sudden death from ventricular arrhythmias. There is little evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs) in this population. Hypothesis Data on demographic, clinical, and ICD intervention history was retrospectively collected on 138 CS patients with ICDs from 11 academic centers throughout the U.S., Canada, and India. We hypothesized that patients with CS would have a high incidence of appropriate ICD therapies. Results Sixty-two of 138 CS patients (44.92%) had an appropriate ICD therapy (ATP or shock) with 39 patients (28.3%) receiving 5 or more therapies (Figure). Forty-eight of 131 patients (36.64%) received an appropriate shock. Thirty-seven of 136 patients (27.21%) had an inappropriate shock. The incidence of appropriate therapy (ATP or shock) was 10.4%/year and the incidence of appropriate shock was 8.5%/year. Twenty-two patients (15.9%) experienced an adverse event, the most common being lead dislodgement in 11 patients (8%). Appropriate therapies (ATP or shock) were more common in patients with syncope 24/37 (65%) versus patients who did not have syncope 38/101 (38%) (p = 0.0065). Appropriate therapies were more common in patients who had ventricular pacing on baseline EKG, 9/10 (90%), compared with those who did not, 53/128 (41%) (p=0.0053). The mean age of patients who received an appropriate therapy (n=59) was 51.7 ± 11.6 compared with 56.9 ± 10.2 for those who did not receive appropriate therapy (n=74) (p = 0.0066). Immunosuppressive medications including steroids, methotrexate, azathioprine, and hydroxychloroquine were not associated with reduced number of appropriate therapies. Conclusions Patients with CS have high rates of appropriate ICD therapies. This population also has high rates of inappropriate shocks and adverse events. Syncope, ventricular pacing, and younger age may identify the highest risk CS 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→