Safety analysis of intermittent hemodialysis in patients with continuous flow left ventricular assist devices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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; 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".