Submitted:
17 May 2023
Posted:
18 May 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Background: Pulmonary emboli (PE) is a life threatening condition that is discovered in many patients only "post mortem". Adequate and timely detection of PE is crucial, because of the high mortality and morbidity and the sudden unexpected hemodynamic collapse that may occur in patients with PE.
Objectives: To assess the ability to predict clinical outcome of patients with acute PE, using a non-gated computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA), based on the dimensions of the right ventricle.
Methods: A retrospective study that analyzed CTPA images of patients admitted with acute PE during the years 2012-2017 in Baruch Padeh Medical Center. The cohort study included 300 patients with documented acute PE, among them 255 were hospitalized in medical (non-intensive care unit) wards, and 45 were patients were hospitalized in an intensive care unit (ICU).
Results: Among the 45 patients admitted to the ICU, 8% died. Larger RV diameters predicted mortality (OR=10.14, 95% CI [1.09-93.86]) as well as lower systolic and diastolic blood pressure measurements (p=0.001 and 0.01).
Among the 255 patients that were admitted in the Internal Medicine Ward 7% died. Older age (p=0.028), sepsis and cancer (both p<0.001), high WBCs count (p<0.001), and renal failure (p<0.001) predicted death.
Overall, of all 300 patients that were admitted, lower blood pressure (systolic and diastolic) (p<0.001, 0.008), older age (p<0.007), sepsis (p<0.001), cancer (p=0.006), higher WBCs count (p<0.001), and impaired renal function (p<0.001) predicted death among patients admitted with confirmed acute PE.
Conclusions: Clinical parameters and hematological parameters could predict the outcome of patients admitted with acute PE. RV diameter, measured by the non-ECG gated CTPA had an additive predictive value for patients who were hemodynamically unstable on admission and were hospitalized in the ICU.
Keywords:
Pulmonary emboli
; PE
; right ventricular (RV) dysfunction
1. Background
Pulmonary emboli (PE) is a life threatening condition that diagnosed in more than 80% of the patients only "post mortem" [1]. In many patients, the presenting clinical manifestation of PE is sudden death. About 10% of the patients with asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT) develop sudden death due to acute PE [2]. Early diagnosis and treatment of PE are important because of the high mortality rate if not treated urgently [3]. Patients with massive PE may present with cardiogenic shock or with multi- organ failure [4]. PE diagnosis is based mainly on clinical characteristics (Wells criteria and Geneva score) [4]. There are biomarkers that may support the diagnosis of PE and its severity like the plasma D-dimer (a fragment generated from fibrin degradation), troponin (represents myocardial damage), and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) or NT-terminal Pro-BNP (NT-Pro-BNP), that estimate the burden on the right ventricle in patients with confirmed PE [5]. Non-ECG gated CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) with multi-detector scanning technique is the "gold standard" to diagnose PE with high sensitivity and high specificity [6].
ECG gated CTPA imaging is the procedure of choice for RV diameter measurements. RV diameter in patients with acute PE may predict in-hospital death, 30-day mortality and 3-month mortality [7,8,9,10]. Patients admitted with a suspicion of acute PE undergo a non-ECG gated CTPA in order to confirm or exclude the diagnosis of PE. However, in that method, measurement of the RV diameter is not accurate enough.
Our aim was to examine the ability to predict in-hospital death of patients with acute PE based on the RV diameter measured by the non-ECG gated CTPA.
2. Methods:
Study Design
A retrospective study that analyzed non-ECG gated CTPA of patients with PE (documented and proved by non-ECG gated CT pulmonary angiography) in the years 2012-2017 in Baruch Padeh Medical Center. 300 patients were found, among them 255 were admitted to the internal medicine wards, and 45 patients were admitted to the ICU.
Demographic and clinical data included age, sex, length of stay in the hospital, active cancer, infections, type 2 diabetes mellitus, heart failure, and autoimmune disease.
Laboratory data included white blood cells (WBCs), D-DIMER, troponin, brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), C - reactive protein (CRP), alkaline phosphatase, bilirubin, BUN and creatinine.
Measurements of the diameters of the RV, LV and the RV/LV ratios recorded according to the method described by Gonzalez and Jimenez [11]. We measured RV diameter in the largest diameter observed, using the non-ECG gated CTPA images of patients that diagnosed with PE.
3. Results
Two hundred eighty patients survived and 20 patients died. Differences between the two groups were tested using Pearson’s Chi-squared test for categorical variables, or one-way ANOVA for continuous variables. Descriptive statistics measures were performed with frequencies for categorical variables (e.g. sex) and averages with standard deviations for continuous variables (e.g. age). Univariate analyses compared between patients who survived and patients who died using Pearson’s Chi-squared test for categorical variables, or one-way ANOVA for continuous variables.
P-value lower than 5% was considered significant.
Table 1 demonstrated that patients who died were older (78.00±12.04 vs. 66.46±18.64 years old, p=0.007), had sepsis (60% vs. 20.4%, p<0.001), active cancer (45% vs. 19.3%, p=0.006), with higher white blood cells counts (19.20±12.24 vs. 10.52±4.21, p<0.001), and impaired renal function (creatinine of 1.29±1.08 vs. 0.88±0.42 mg/dL, p<0.001).
Parameters that predicted death in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (8%) included: larger RV diameters (measured by the non-ECG gated CTPA0 (5.47±0.67 cm vs. 4.55±0.80 cm, p=0.03), lower systolic blood pressures (84.5±37.92 vs. 134.10±24.68 mmHg, p<0.001), lower diastolic blood pressure (54.75±23.40 vs. 75.37±14.02 mmHg, p=0.01), and higher WBC counts (16.20±11.41 vs. 11.17±4.09 x103/L, p=0.06)(Table 2).
Old age (p=0.028), sepsis (p<0.001), cancer (p<0.001), high WBC count (p<0.001), and impaired renal function (p<0.001) predicted death (7%) among patients with acute PE that were admitted to the Internal Medicine Ward (Table 3).
4. Discussion
Our study showed that there are two groups of patients with acute PE. Those who present in the emergency department with signs and symptoms of hemodynamic compromise, and those who are admitted without signs of shock or other clinical and laboratory signs of hemodynamic instability and multi-organ failure.
Our study showed that RV diameter measured by non-ECG gated CTPA could predict death among patients admitted with acute PE to ICU. Our study has demonstrated that using non-ECG gated CTPA is feasible, and can be part of the criteria to define patients at risk admitted to the ICU with acute PE.
The ability to predict mortality in patients admitted with acute PE to the ICU is in line with previous studies that had demonstrated that acute RV dilatation and dysfunction lead to acute hemodynamic de-compensation of patients with PE [10]. Since death in patients, presenting with shock occurs within the first hours of presentation, a rapid therapeutic action and monitoring is required [17]. In acute RV pressure overload, RV systolic pressure increases and function begins to decline. The clinical presentation is decreased cardiac output, decreased blood pressure and multi-organ failure [1].
Our study showed that the ability to predict death among patients with acute PE (but without hemodynamic compromise) is based on clinical and laboratory simple affordable data like blood pressure, old age, sepsis on admission, cancer, and impaired renal function (even mild renal failure).
In sub massive PE (25% of the patients) we find right ventricular dilatation and dysfunction with normal systemic arterial pressures. These patients are prone to deteriorate with a high risk of death [11]. PE may cause right ventricular overload with RV dilatation and dysfunction. RV dysfunction may lead to RV failure, severe hemodynamic compromise and death [12,13,14,15,16].
Non-ECG gated CTPA is the gold standard method to diagnose PE [17]. Studies have shown an increased RV/LV diameter ratio (measured in the standard axial or reformatted four-chamber views) as a predictor of mortality in patients with PE [18]. In the current study, we used a non-ECG gated CTPA protocol to measure RV and LV as a diagnostic tool [19,20].
We also found that clinical parameters and simple laboratory tests are valuable for risk estimation and have a prognostic value. Age, white blood cells count, sepsis, cancer, renal function, and blood pressure are still key factors that can predict the clinical outcome in patients with acute PE.
4.1. Study Limitations
This study has several limitations:
The sample size for this study was relatively small (N=300), which limits the statistical power to achieve significant results. Specifically, the sample size of the intensive-care patients is limited (N=45), and therefore less significant results were found in the models conducted on this sample.
4.2. Summary
Among patients admitted to the ICU (based on clinical parameters) RV diameter (non-ECG gated CTPA) predicted death. Among patients that did not have clinical parameters of cardiogenic shock or multi-organ failure and admitted to the department of internal medicine, RV diameter did not predict death. In this group older patient, those who had higher leukocyte counts, impaired renal function, active cancer, or sepsis were at a higher risk to die within the hospital stay.
Author Contributions
Alexander Chijik MD – collected the data from the files and measured the RV dimensions. Michael Jerdev MD – collected the data and measured the RV dimensions. Wadie Abu Dahoud MSc – performed the statistical analysis. Yaron Sela PhD – performed the statistical analysis and helped to write the first draft Arnon Blum MD – conceived the trial, organized the whole plan, wrote the Ethics protocol and the protocol of the study, and wrote the first and the final drafts of the MN.
Funding
Please add: “This research received no external funding” or “This research was funded by NAME OF FUNDER, grant number XXX” and “The APC was funded by XXX”. Check carefully that the details given are accurate and use the standard spelling of funding agency names at https://search.crossref.org/funding, any errors may affect your future funding.
Conflicts of Interest
Declare conflicts of interest or state “The authors declare no conflict of interest.” Authors must identify and declare any personal circumstances or interest that may be perceived as inappropriately influencing the representation or interpretation of reported research results. Any role of the funders in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results must be declared in this section. If there is no role, please state “The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results”.
References
- Goldman, L.; Schafer, A.I. Pulmonary embolism. Goldman’s Cecil medicine, Philadelphia, PA; 24th edition; 2011, 597, 596–602. [Google Scholar]
- Phillippe, H.M. Overview of venous thromboembolism. The American journal of managed care. 2017, 23, 376–82. [Google Scholar]
- Meyer, N.J.; Schmidt, G.A. Pulmonary embolic disorders: thrombus, air, and fat. Principles of Critical Care. 3rd ed. New York, NY: The McGraw-Hill Professional Companies. 2005, 366-367.
- Engelke, C.; Manstein, P.; Rummeny, E.J.; et al. Suspected and incidental pulmonary embolism on multidetector-row CT: analysis of technical and morphological factors influencing the diagnosis in a cross-sectional cancer centre patient cohort. Clinical radiology. 2006, 61, 71–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Henzler, T.; Roeger, S.; Meyer, M.; et al. Pulmonary embolism: CT signs and cardiac biomarkers for predicting right ventricular dysfunction. European Respiratory Journal. 2012, 39, 919–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Remy-Jardin, M.; Pistolesi, M.; Goodman, L.R.; et al. Management of suspected acute pulmonary embolism in the era of CT angiography: a statement from the Fleischner Society. Radiology. 2007, 245, 315–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jaff, M.R.; McMurtry, M.S.; Archer, S.L.; et al. Management of massive and submassive pulmonary embolism, iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis, and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2011, 123, 1788–1830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Plasencia-Martínez, J.M.; Carmona-Bayonas, A.; Calvo-Temprano, D.; et al. Prognostic value of computed tomography pulmonary angiography indices in patients with cancer-related pulmonary embolism: data from a multicenter cohort study. European journal of radiology. 2017, 87, 66–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Becattini, C.; Cohen, A.T.; Agnelli, G.; et al. Risk stratification of patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism based on presence or absence of lower extremity DVT: systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest. 2016, 149, 192–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Torbicki, A.; van Beek, E.J.R.; Charbonnier, B.; et al. Guidelines on diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism. Task Force on Pulmonary Embolism – European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2000, 21, 1301–1336. [Google Scholar]
- Gonzalez, G.; Jimenez-Carretero, D.; Rodriguez-Lopez, S.; et al. Automated axial right ventricle to left ventricle diameter ratio computation in computed tomography pulmonary angiography. PLoS One. 2015, 22, 127–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yamamoto, T. Management of patients with high-risk pulmonary embolism: a narrative review. Journal of intensive care. 2018, 6, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Quiroz, R.; Kucher, N.; Zou, K.H.; et al. Clinical validity of a negative computed tomography scan in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: a systematic review. Jama. 2005, 293, 2012–2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stein, P.D.; Fowler, S.E.; Goodman, L.R.; et al. Multidetector computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism. New England Journal of Medicine. 2006, 354, 2317–2327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ghaye, B.; Ghuysen, A.; Bruyere, P.J.; et al. Can CT pulmonary angiography allow assessment of severity and prognosis in patients presenting with pulmonary embolism? What the radiologist needs to know. Radiographics. 2006, 26, 23–39. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Ghuysen, A.; Lambermont, B.; Kolh, P.; et al. Alteration of right ventricular-pulmonary vascular coupling in a porcine model of progressive pressure overloading. Shock. 2008, 29, 197–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mansencal, N.; Joseph, T.; Vieillard-Baron, A.; et al. Diagnosis of right ventricular dysfunction in acute pulmonary embolism using helical computed tomography. The American journal of cardiology. 2005, 95, 1260–1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- van der Meer, R.W.; Pattynama, P.M.; van Strijen, M.J.; et al. Right ventricular dysfunction and pulmonary obstruction index at helical CT: prediction of clinical outcome during 3-month follow-up in patients with acute pulmonary embolism. Radiology, 2005, 235, 798–803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lu, M.T.; Demehri, S.; Cai, T.; et al. Axial and reformatted four-chamber right ventricle–to–left ventricle diameter ratios on pulmonary ct angiography as predictors of death after acute pulmonary embolism. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2012, 198, 1353–1360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kang, D.K.; Thilo, C.; Schoepf, U.J.; et al. CT signs of right ventricular dysfunction: prognostic role in acute pulmonary embolism. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging. 2011, 4, 841–849. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
Table 1.
All patients (N = 300); clinical & laboratory parameters on admission.
| Survival (N=280) |
Death (N=20) |
P-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intensive care | 41 (14.6%) | 4 (20.0%) | 0.517 | |
| Thrombolysis | 16 (5.7%) | 3 (15.0%) | 0.100 | |
| SBP (mm HG) | 128.08±22.34 | 114.65±27.02 | 0.011 | |
| DBP (mm HG) | 74.81±13.24 | 66.60±14.51 | 0.008 | |
| RV diameter (cm) | 4.19±0.70 | 4.04±1.05 | 0.379 | |
| LV diameter (cm) | 3.34±0.79 | 3.15±1.09 | 0.325 | |
| RV/LV Ratio | 1.30±0.40 | 1.38±0.70 | 0.410 | |
| Pulmonary artery (cm) | 2.97±0.41 | 2.85±0.52 | 0.200 | |
| Age (years) | 66.46±18.64 | 78.00±12.04 | 0.007 | |
| Female | 163 (58.2%) | 14 (70.0%) | 0.301 | |
| Diabetes mellitus | 76 (27.1%) | 6 (30.0%) | 0.782 | |
| Heart failure | 77 (27.5%) | 8 (40.0%) | 0.231 | |
| Renal failure | 24 (8.6%) | 3 (15.0%) | 0.332 | |
| Autoimmune disease | 22 (7.9%) | 2 (10.0%) | 0.733 | |
| Infection | 57 (20.4%) | 12 (60.0%) | 0.001 | |
| Cancer | 54 (19.3%) | 9 (45.0%) | 0.006 | |
| D-dimer (pg/mL) | 3.84 ± 2.94 | 5.77 ± 3.91 | 0.203 | |
| Troponin (ng/L) | 51.74 ± 282.68 | 2.42 ± 3.50 | 0.547 | |
| BNP (pg/mL) | 295.18± 372.29 | 138.33± 142.63 | 0.471 | |
| CRP (mg/L) | 56.43 ± 38.45 | 71.63 ± 37.07 | 0.318 | |
| WBC (x103/L) | 10.52 ± 4.21 | 19.20 ± 12.24 | 0.001 | |
| BUN (mg/dL) | 21.12 ± 12.79 | 43.79 ± 34.98 | 0.001 | |
| Creatinine (mg/dL) | 0.88 ± 0.42 | 1.29 ± 1.08 | 0.001 | |
| Bilirubin (mg/dL) | 1.25 ± 7.69 | 0.98 ± 0.60 | 0.885 | |
| Alkaline Phosphatase (U/L) | 107.88 ± 91.14 | 146.33 ± 63.38 | 0.080 | |
| Hospitalization days | 10.07 ± 9.54 | 8.35 ± 6.49 | 0.427 |
Values represent means ± standard deviations for continuous variables and counts (proportions) for categorical variables. P-value comparing the two groups using ANOVA for continuous variables and the Chi-square test for categorical variables.
Table 2.
ICU patients (N = 45); clinical parameters on admission.
| Survival (N=41) |
Death (N=4) |
P-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate | 29 (10.4%) | 2 (10.0%) | 0.393 | |
| Days in intensive care | 5.10±5.49 | 2.00±2.00 | 0.273 | |
| Days to intensive care | 3.92 ± 3.78 | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 0.504 | |
| Thrombolysis | 6 (14.6%) | 2 (50.0%) | 0.077 | |
| SBP (mm HG) | 134.10±24.68 | 84.50±37.92 | 0.001 | |
| DBP (mm HG) | 75.37±14.02 | 54.75±23.40 | 0.011 | |
| RV diameter (cm) | 4.55±0.80 | 5.47±0.67 | 0.030 | |
| LV diameter (cm) | 3.22±0.87 | 3.12±1.82 | 0.845 | |
| RV/LV Ratio | 1.54±0.55 | 2.10±1.05 | 0.081 | |
| Pulmonary artery (cm) | 3.00 ± 0.35 | 3.25 ± 0.80 | 0.238 | |
| Age (years) | 62.54 ± 18.68 | 79.75 ± 10.50 | 0.078 | |
| Female | 22 (53.7%) | 2 (50.0%) | 0.889 | |
| Diabetes mellitus | 8 (19.5%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0.330 | |
| Heart failure | 9 (22.0%) | 1 (25.0%) | 0.889 | |
| Renal failure | 2 (4.9%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0.651 | |
| Autoimmune disease | 2 (4.9%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0.651 | |
| Infection | 6 (14.6%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0.411 | |
| Cancer | 6 (14.6%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0.411 | |
| D-dimer (pg/mL) | 4.91±3.03 | NA | ||
| Troponin (ng/L) | 60.30±224.23 | 0.08±0.06 | 0.649 | |
| BNP (pg/mL) | 279.52±321.80 | NA | ||
| CRP (mg/L) | 21.70±24.09 | NA | ||
| WBC (x103/L) | 11.17±4.09 | 16.20±11.41 | 0.060 | |
| BUN (mg/dL) | 18.37±8.15 | 23.00±11.79 | 0.359 | |
| Creatinine (mg/dL) | 0.88±0.31 | 1.17±0.21 | 0.132 | |
| Bilirubin (mg/dL) | 0.82±0.36 | 1.13± .31 | 0.150 | |
| Alkaline Phosphatase (U/L) | 87.37±30.67 | 118.33±29.28 | 0.098 | |
| Hospitalization days | 15.78±14.41 | 4.50±4.04 | 0.130 |
Values represent means ± standard deviations for continuous variables and counts (proportions) for categorical variables. P-value comparing the two groups using ANOVA for continuous variables and the Chi-square test for categorical variables
Table 3.
Patients admitted to the internal medicine ward (non ICU) (N = 255).
| Survival (N=239) |
Death (N=16) |
P-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thrombolysis | 10 (4.2%) | 1 (6.2%) | 0.694 | |
| SBP (mmHG) | 127.05 ± 21.80 | 122.19 ± 18.29 | 0.385 | |
| DBP (mmHG) | 74.72 ± 13.13 | 69.56 ± 10.50 | 0.125 | |
| RV diameter (cm) | 4.13 ± 0.66 | 3.69 ± 0.80 | 0.011 | |
| LV diameter (cm) | 3.36 ± 0.78 | 3.16 ± 0.92 | 0.330 | |
| RV/LV Ratio | 1.26 ± 0.36 | 1.21 ± 0.47 | 0.545 | |
| Pulmonary artery (cm) | 2.96 ± 0.42 | 2.74 ± 0.40 | 0.044 | |
| Age (years) | 67.14 ± 18.59 | 77.56 ± 12.68 | 0.028 | |
| Female | 141 (59.0%) | 12 (75.0%) | 0.206 | |
| Diabetes mellitus | 68 (28.5%) | 6 (37.5%) | 0.440 | |
| Heart failure | 68 (28.5%) | 7 (43.8%) | 0.194 | |
| Renal failure | 22 (9.2%) | 3 (18.8%) | 0.214 | |
| Autoimmune disease | 20 (8.4%) | 2 (12.5%) | 0.569 | |
| Infection | 51 (21.3%) | 12 (75.0%) | < 0.001 | |
| Cancer | 48 (20.1%) | 9 (56.2%) | < 0.001 | |
| D-dimer (pg/mL) | 3.61 ± 2.89 | 5.77 ± 3.91 | 0.150 | |
| Troponin (ng/L) | 49.94 ± 294.04 | 3.19 ± 3.75 | 0.635 | |
| BNP (pg/mL) | 297.52 ± 381.36 | 138.33 ± 142.63 | 0.476 | |
| CRP (mg/L) | 57.82 ± 38.36 | 71.63 ± 37.07 | 0.364 | |
| WBC (x103/L) | 10.41 ± 4.23) | 19.96 ± 12.68) | < 0.001 | |
| BUN (mg/dL) | 21.60 ± 13.38 | 47.69 ± 36.70 | < 0.001 | |
| Creatinine (mg/dL) | 0.88 ± 0.43 | 1.32 ± 1.18 | < 0.001 | |
| BUN/creatinine ratio | 26.36 ± 17.52 | 38.85 ± 18.91 | 0.006 | |
| Bilirubin (mg/dL) | 1.33 ± 8.39 | 0.95 ± 0.65 | 0.863 | |
| Alkaline Phosphatase (U/L) | 111.74 ± 98.02 | 151.93 ± 67.48 | 0.120 | |
| Hospitalization days | 9.10 ± 8.08 | 9.31 ± 6.72 | 0.917 |
Values represent means ± standard deviations for continuous variables and counts (proportions) for categorical variables. P-value comparing the two groups using ANOVA for continuous variables and the Chi-square test for categorical variables.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
