Cardiac surgery in nonagenarians: hospital mortality and long-term follow-up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nonagenarians represent a growing part of the population. However, it is assumed that they present a poorer functional class to cope with the stress inferred by surgical interventions. The aim of this study was to review our experience with nonagenarians concerning postoperative morbidities, mortality, and long-term survival status. Retrospective data from 30 consecutive nonagenarians who underwent cardiac surgery between January 1990 and December 2002, and their long-term follow-up was analysed. There were 18 women (60%) and 11 men. Left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) was 50.3+/-10.5%. Fifty percent of the patients were in NYHA functional class III or IV. There were nine coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) procedures (30%), 16 aortic valve replacements (AVR), (53%), one double valve procedure and one replacement of infected intracavitary pace-maker leads. In-hospital mortality rate was 20% (6/30). Mean follow-up was 21.5+/-19 months (r: 2.2 to 68). Actuarial survival rate at 12, 24 and 60 months was 67%, 43% and 30%, respectively. Surviving patients referred quality of life as good, all but one were in NYHA functional class I. Nonagenarians undergoing cardiac surgery have higher mortality and morbidity rates than younger patients. However, in a carefully selected group of patients, the operative risk remains acceptable.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".