El comportamiento del strain longitudinal regional depende de la reserva coronaria en un análisis simultáneo durante el eco-estrés con dipiridamol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The relationship between regional and global longitudinal strain and coronary flow reserve has been poorly studied. Objectives: The primary aim of this study was to compare the behavior of apical and global longitudinal strain with the coronary anterior descending artery flow reserve and the secondary aim was to compare these responses with the visual analysis of wall motion during dipyridamole stress echocardiography. Methods: A retrospective study was performed including 179 patients (50.3% men, n=90) with mean age 68.7 ± 7.8 years. Coronary flow reserve was measured at peak dipyridamole effect, simultaneously with longitudinal strain and the visual analysis of contractility. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1: Coronary flow reserve ≥2 and Group 2: <2. Apical strain was defined as the average of 4 apical segments and global strain as the average of the 17 segments. Any increase in strain was considered normal. Results: One hundred and thirteen patients (63.12%) were included in Group 1 and 66 (36.87%) in Group 2. Apical strain: 96.77% of Group 1 patients increased their strain values with stress, while in Group 2, 95.31% worsened their strain values (p <0.0001). Global Strain: 82.8% of Group 1 patients increased their values, while in Group 2, 78.8% worsened their values (p <0.01). Post dipyridamole wall motion analysis: 96.46% of Group 1 patients had preserved wall motion and only 54.5% of Group 2 showed this behavior (only 4 patients evidenced increased apical strain). Conclusions: There was a close correlation between coronary flow reserve and apical longitudinal strain which was superior to the use of global longitudinal strain. Apical strain showed a better correlation with anterior descending artery coronary flow reserve than with the visual analysis of contractility.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".