MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045350560 · doi:10.1532/hsf98.20041112

Selective Use of Off-Pump Coronary Bypass Surgery Reduces Mortality and Neurologic Morbidity Associated with High-Risk Coronary Bypass Surgery: A 400-Case Comparative Experience

2004· article· en· W2045350560 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeffrey P. Gold, John D. Wasnick, William Maldarelli, Ilya Zhuraavlev, Douglas Condit

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Heart Surgery Forum · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOff-pump coronary artery bypassSurgeryMyocardial infarctionStroke (engine)Ejection fractionBypass surgeryCoronary artery bypass surgeryCoronary artery diseaseAnginaCardiologyCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyArteryInternal medicineHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The frequency of use of off-pump coronary artery bypass (CAB) surgery to surgically treat coronary artery disease has varied greatly from center to center and from surgeon to surgeon because of preference, training, and experience. We report an experience with 400 consecutive isolated CAB procedures selectively managed with on-pump or off-pump surgery, according to the perceived potential for aortic embolization or stroke as determined by clinical and imaging determinations. The off-pump CAB group (46 patients) was 7.1 years older (P < .05) and had an 11% lower ejection fraction (P < .03) than the on-pump group. There was no difference in gender, urgency of surgery, hemodynamic stability, angina class, or incidence of prior myocardial infarction. All 400 patients underwent intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography, and many underwent an epiaortic study to supplement image quality. Patients without palpable or imaged advanced aortic disease or deemed to be at clinically high risk for stroke (advanced age, prior strokes, or advanced cerebrovascular or peripheral vascular disease) underwent on-pump procedures requiring 55 minutes of aortic ischemia and 97 minutes of high-flow, high-pressure bypass on average. All others underwent off-pump procedures. The numbers of grafts per patient were similar (3.2 on-pump, 2.8 off-pump; = ns). There was no in-hospital or 30-day mortality in either group. Using the New York State risk-adjustment algorithm, we found the predicted mortality rate for the off-pump group was higher (2.24% on-pump versus 5.54% off-pump, P = .008). The postoperative length of stay was longer in the off-bypass group (3.67 days versus 4.31 days, P = .003). The frequencies of hospital readmission and perioperative complications (renal, pulmonary, infection, bleeding, cardiac, neurologic) were similar, and there were no postoperative strokes in either group. The selective use of off-pump surgery safely managed patients at higher risk for perioperative stroke and associated embolic multisystem organ failure and death. Individual surgeon and center-wide use of a selective approach is recommended as an alternative to a single-procedure nonselective approaches.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Heart Surgery ForumSame topicCardiac and Coronary Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207