MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1925721499 · doi:10.1111/hdi.12073

Safety analysis of intermittent hemodialysis in patients with continuous flow left ventricular assist devices

2013· article· en· W1925721499 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammed Quader, Dhiren Kumar, Keyur B. Shah, Yahya I. Fatani, Gundars Katlaps, Vigneshwar Kasirajan

Bibliographic record

VenueHemodialysis International · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHemodialysisDialysisAsymptomaticBlood pressurePulsatile flowCardiologySurgeryAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dialysis centers adopt a cautious approach when it comes to performing intermittent hemodialysis (HD) on patients with continuous flow (CF) left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) because of the potential for volume flux-related complications and absence of pulsatile blood pressure for monitoring. Many patients have to remain hospitalized because of the inability of the dialysis centers to accept them for outpatient dialysis. In this study, the effect of HD was observed in such patients. Between June 2009 and October 2012, 139 patients received LVADs, of which 10 patients (7%) required intermittent HD postoperatively. The mean age of the patients was 53 ± 14 years and 90% were men. A total of 281 dialysis sessions were administered amounting to 1025 hours of dialysis. The mean systolic blood pressure monitored with Doppler device was 97 ± 18 mmHg. Dialysis durations averaged 218 ± 18 minutes. Mean blood flow rate was 334 ± 38 cc/min, and 2.6 ± 1.1 L was ultrafiltrated during each session. Only 15 (5.3%) sessions were interrupted or terminated in six patients. The reasons for termination were symptomatic hypotension--6 (2.1%), asymptomatic hypotension--3 (1%), ventricular tachycardia--1 (0.36%), dialysis machine malfunction--2 (0.7%), low phosphorus--2 (0.7%), and abdominal cramps--1 (0.36%). Volume expansion was necessary on three occasions. Low-flow device alarms were registered during two (0.71%) sessions. The results showed no serious adverse effects or deaths.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations25
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHemodialysis InternationalSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207