Long-Term Outcome of Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in Patients With Severe Left Ventricular Dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is indicated in patients with coronary artery disease and impaired ventricular function. However, earlier studies have suggested that prognosis of patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction is extremely poor. We used the APPROACH registry to derive contemporary estimates of prognosis associated with CABG for this high-risk patient population. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study group consisted of 7841 patients who had isolated CABG in the province of Alberta, Canada between 1996 and 2001. Patients with markedly reduced left ventricular function (ejection fraction [EF] <30%, Lo EF, n =430) were compared with those with moderate reduction in ventricular function (EF 30% to 50%, Med EF, n =2581) and those with normal left ventricular function (EF >50%, normal [Nl] EF, n=4830). The operative mortality was higher in the patient group with Lo EF (4.6%) compared with Med EF and Nl EF groups (3.4% and 1.9%, respectively, P<0.001). At 5 years, survival was 77.7% for Lo EF patients compared with 85.5% and 91.2% for Med EF and Nl EF patients, respectively (P<0.001). After controlling for other independent variables, the adjusted hazard ratio for death was 1.98 (95% CI, 1.49 to 2.62) for Lo EF relative to Nl EF. The mortality rate at 1 year was significantly lower for Lo EF patients who underwent CABG than it was for nonrevascularized Lo EF patients (risk-adjusted odds ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: In the modern era of cardiac surgery, CABG can be performed in Lo EF cases with an acceptable perioperative mortality risk. Our estimate of 5-year survival in this high-risk group is better than previously reported in the literature from earlier periods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".