Permanent Explantation of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although ICD therapy is seen as an irrevocable mode of therapy in most patients, a small number of patients do have their devices permanently explanted. The long-term outcome in these patients has not been described. The purpose of this single center study was to evaluate the long-term outcome of patients whose ICD was explanted and not replaced and to propose clinical variables that can be considered when making the decision to discontinue therapy. Ten of 323 (3.1%) patients in our ICD registry had their devices permanently explanted or turned off between 1986 and December 1998. The devices had been in place for 39 +/- 31 months preexplant. No patient had received appropriate therapy prior to surgery, which was indicated for infection or lead fracture. All patients are alive and well 75 +/- 30 months postexplant with 1 (10%) patient requiring late reimplantation. We reviewed the English language literature describing ICD explanation without replacement. A total of 151 patients were reported in eight studies and were followed for up to 30 months postexplant. Excluding patients with terminal illness or heart transplantation 57.6% survived without reimplantation. In selected patients, after not using an ICD for a long period and when clinical circumstances justify, device therapy may be discontinued with some degree of safety.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".