MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On-Pump and Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in the Elderly: Predictors of Adverse Outcome

2001· article· en· W2075342145 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marco Ricci, Hratch L. Karamanoukian, Giuseppe D'Ancona, Jacob Bergsland, Tomas A. Salerno

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiac Surgery · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeCardiopulmonary bypassStroke (engine)CardiologyMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineArteryRevascularizationUnivariate analysisIncidence (geometry)Logistic regressionRetrospective cohort studyOff-pump coronary artery bypassSurgeryMultivariate analysisBypass grafting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To establish the role that coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) without cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) may have in improving perioperative outcomes of patients 70 years of age and older. BACKGROUND: Coronary revascularization in elderly patients is associated with morbidity and mortality rates higher than those observed in younger patients. The impact of CABG without CPB on perioperative outcomes has not been clearly established. METHODS: This retrospective, nonrandomized study consisted of 1,872 CABG patients. Of these, 1389 underwent CABG with CPB (CPB group) and 483 patients underwent CABG without CPB (off-pump group). Preoperative variables and outcomes were compared between the two groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of mortality, stroke, and adverse outcome. RESULTS: Demographics, Canadian Cardiovascular Society staging, operative priority, and other preoperative variables were comparable between the two groups. The prevalence of previous myocardial infarction was higher in the CPB group (62.6% vs 56.7%; p < 0.005), whereas the prevalence of calcified aorta and preoperative renal failure were higher in the off-pump group (5.4% vs 9.5%; p = 0.04 and 1.7% vs 3.3%; p = 0.04, respectively). Although the graft/patient ratio was higher in the CPB group (3.4 vs 1.9), these patients displayed more extensive coronary artery involvement. At univariate analysis, patients in the off-pump group had a higher rate of freedom from complications (88.2% vs 81.3%; p < 0.005) and a lower incidence of stroke (2.1% vs 4.2%; p = 0.034) than patients in the CPB group. Although there was a trend for a higher actual mortality in the off-pump group (4.8% vs 3.7%; p = ns), the risk adjusted mortality in this group was lower (1.9% vs 2.1%). Multivariate analysis showed that while the use of CPB correlated independently with an increased risk of overall complications, it was not associated with a higher probability of death or stroke. CONCLUSIONS: This investigation suggests that elderly patients undergoing CABG may benefit from off-pump revascularization, as the use of CPB correlated independently with an increased risk of overall complications. However, CPB did not emerge as an independent predictor of death or stroke at multivariate analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations21
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiac SurgerySame topicCardiac and Coronary Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207