Abstract 17262: Outcomes following High Risk Surgery provided as an Alternative to Transplant in patients with End-stage Heart Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Heart transplant (Tx) and ventricular assist device (VAD) have become established treatments for end stage heart failure; however, both treatments still have unsolved problems. Patients referred for Tx or VAD are often found to have cardiac lesions amenable to surgical intervention. We examined the results of conventional surgery in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction to explore the possibility of high risk surgery as an alternative option. Methods: We reviewed our institutional database and identified all surgical patients referred to our senior author with severe LV dysfunction (EF<20%). We then selected patients who were initially referred for consideration of Tx or VAD, but were instead offered conventional surgery. All patients underwent evaluation for Tx candidacy and thus were prospectively stratified into Tx eligible (Tx-E) or Tx non-eligible (Tx-NE) groups. We compared outcomes stratified by Tx eligibility as well as by type of surgery. Results: A total of 133 patients were enrolled. 68 patients were Tx-E, and 65 were Tx-NE. Tx-E patients were younger than Tx-NE (57±8 vs 70±8 year-old, p<0.01). Isolated CABG was performed in 77 patients, while 56 had other procedures. In-hospital mortality was 8.8% in Tx-E, and 15.4% in Tx-NE (p=0.29). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that survival in Tx-E was comparable to ISHLT Tx data, while survival in Tx-NE was comparable to INTERMACS DT data (Figure1). When stratified by type of surgery, in-hospital mortality was lower for isolated CABG (6.5% vs 19.6%, p=0.03). Isolated CABG seemed to have comparable survival to ISHLT Tx and INTERMACS DT by Kaplan-Meier analysis (Figure2). Conclusion: The mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing alternative surgeries appears to be similar to the contemporary results of Tx and VAD destination therapy. Particularly if the pathology of heart failure is graftable coronary artery disease, isolated CABG may be a good option for highly selected 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".