The impact of brain death on survival after heart transplantation: time is of the essence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that the modality of brain death and time from brain death until harvest impact survival and rejection after heart transplantation. METHODS: Donor files from 475 adult heart-transplant recipients were examined. From these files, a total management time (time from incident leading to brain death until aortic cross clamp) was determined, and the cause of brain death was noted. Recipient characteristics, details of postoperative course, as well as survival were obtained from the Stanford University Medical Center Heart Transplantation Database. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty (48.4%) donors sustained traumatic injuries, 112 (23.6%) suffered a subarachnoid hemorrhage, and 102 (21.4%) died of a gunshot wound to the head. The modality of brain death did not influence medium and long-term survival. A management time longer than 72 hours was associated with poorer outcome of the heart-transplant recipients. There were significantly more treated rejection episodes in recipients whose donor sustained traumatic injuries. CONCLUSION: Modality of brain death does not impact survival but appears to influence rejection. Increased management time is associated with adverse survival trends in heart-transplant recipients.
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 | 0.001 | 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".