Use of Impella 5L for Acute Allograft Rejection Postcardiac Transplant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The contribution of acute allograft rejection to posttransplant mortality has decreased over time primarily due to improvements in maintenance immunosuppression and in the diagnosis and treatment of rejection. Nevertheless, acute heart allograft rejection remains an important clinical problem.2 In the setting of an acute allograft rejection, mechanical circulatory support has been provided by a variety of devices, ranging from intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) to extracorporeal membrane oxygenators (ECMO), left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) and biventricular assist devices (BIVADs).2 We present a 45-year-old patient with cardiogenic shock secondary to acute allograft rejection after orthotopic heart transplantation. Patient continued to have poor hemodynamics and low cardiac output despite being on high doses of inotropes and an aggressive immunosuppression. Hence, a decision was made to support the hemodynamics with an Impella LP 5.0 (Abiomed Inc, Danvers, MA) left ventricular assist device (LVAD).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".