Waitlist Outcomes for Pediatric Heart Transplantation in the Current Era: An Analysis of the Pediatric Heart Transplant Society Database
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Waitlist mortality (WM) remains elevated in pediatric heart transplantation. Allocation policy is a potential tool to help improve WM. This study aims to identify patients at highest risk for WM to potentially inform future allocation policy changes. METHODS: The Pediatric Heart Transplant Society database was queried for patients <18 years of age indicated for heart transplantation between January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2021. Waitlist mortality was defined as death while awaiting transplant or removal from the waitlist due to clinical deterioration. Because WM is low after the first year, analysis was limited to the first 12 months on the heart transplant list. Kaplan–Meier analysis and log-rank testing was conducted to compare unadjusted survival between groups. Cox proportional hazard models were created to determine risk factors for WM. Subgroup analysis was performed for status 1A patients based on body surface area (BSA) at time of listing, cardiac diagnosis, and presence of mechanical circulatory support. RESULTS: In total 5974 children met study criteria of which 3928 were status 1A, 1012 were status 1B, 963 were listed status 2, and 65 were listed status 7. Because of the significant burden of WM experienced by 1A patients, further analysis was performed in only patients indicated as 1A. Within that group of patients, those with smaller size and lower eGFR had higher WM, whereas those patients without congenital heart disease or support from a ventricular assist device (VAD) at time of listing had decreased WM. In the smallest size cohort, cardiac diagnoses other than dilated cardiomyopathy were risk factors for WM. Previous cardiac surgery was a risk factor in the 0.3 to 0.7 m 2 and >0.7 m 2 BSA groups. VAD support was associated with lower WM other than in the single ventricle cohort, where VAD was associated with higher WM. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and mechanical ventilation were associated with increased risk of WM in all cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variability in WM among status-1A patients. Potential refinements to current allocation system should factor in the increased WM risk we identified in patients supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or mechanical ventilation, single ventricle congenital heart disease on VAD support and small children with congenital heart disease, restrictive cardiomyopathy, or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».