Influence of Body Size on Clinical Outcome in Patients Undergoing Coronary Surgery with or Without Cardiopulmonary Bypass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in overweight patients carries significant morbidity. We compare the effectiveness of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery versus conventional CABG using cardiopulmonary bypass and cardioplegic arrest, in a consecutive series of overweight patients. Methods:From April 1996 to April 2001, data from 4321 patients undergoing coronary revascularisation (mortality 1.4%) were prospectively entered into the Patients Analysis and Tracking System. Data were extracted for all patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25. In hospital mortality and early morbidity were compared between patients undergoing on- and off-pump coronary surgery. A risk-adjusted analysis was also carried out to assess the influence of surgery on outcomes. Results: 2844 overweight patients with BMI ≥ 25 were identified, and of these 674 (23.7%) were operated on with off-pump surgery. On-pump patients were less likely to have unstable angina, hypercholesterolaemia, to have coronary disease involving the left main stem, or to have a BMI ≥ 30. However, they had more extensive coronary disease, were more likely to have suffered previous myocardial infarction, and received more grafts than those undergoing off-pump surgery. Intra- and post-operative arrhythmias, inotropic use, and post-operative low cardiac output, use of IABP, blood loss, transfusion requirement, chest infections, neurological complications including permanent stroke, ICU and hospital stay all were significantly reduced in the off-pump group (all p < 0.05). After adjustment for age, gender, ejection fraction, extent of coronary disease, and degree of urgency, odd ratios (ORs) for most of the adverse outcomes investigated, confirmed significant benefit of off-pump surgery (table). The point estimate of the adjusted effect size for in-hospital mortality also indicated benefit from off-pump surgery (table). Variable On-Pump (2169) Off-Pump (674) OR/Mean Difference 95% CI p Death 20 (0.92%) 2 (0.29%) 0.37 0.08, 1.59 0.18 Postoperative MI 35 (1.6%) 14 (2.0%) 1.37 0.72, 2.62 0.337 New Inotropes 879 (40.5%) 219 (32.5%) 0.8 0.66, 0.97 0.02 New IABP 54 (2.5%) 5 (0.7%) 0.32 0.12, 0.8 0.015 Ward arrhythmia 320 (14.8%) 65 (9.6%) 0.63 0.47, 0.84 0.002 Chest Infection 106 (4.9%) 14 (2.1%) 0.43 0.24, 0.76 0.004 Neurolog. Complic. 59 (2.7%) 6 (0.9%) 0.36 0.15, 0.85 0.02 Blood Loss (ml) 939.9(512.3) 856.2 (582.1) −60.8 −111.7, −9.87 0.019 Total RBCs (unit) 1.05 (1.51) 0.436 (1.52) −0.51 −0.65, −0.37 0.0001 Total Platelets (unit) 0.24 (0.81) 0.08 (0.455) −0.157 −0.23, −0.08 0.0001 Total FFP (unit) 0.49 (1.48) 0.126 (0.72) −0.38 −0.5, −0.25 0.0001 Sternal rewiring 17 (0.78%) 1 (0.14%) −0.22 0.03, 1.7 0.15 Renal complications 98 (4.5%) 24 (3.56%) −0.74 0.44, 1.25 0.265 Hospital stay (day) 7.76 (4.26) 6.64 (3.04) −0.94 −1.39, −0.49 0.0001 Conclusions: These results suggest that off-pump surgery is safe, effective and associated with reduced morbidity in overweight patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".