Donors' characteristics and impact on outcomes in pediatric heart transplant recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organ availability and acceptability limit pediatric HTx. What characteristics define an unacceptable or high-risk pediatric donor remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to characterize a large cohort of pediatric donors and determine the donor risk factors, including cumulative risk, that affect recipient survival. Data from the PHTS, a prospective multicenter study, were used to examine the impact of donor factors on the outcomes of patients listed <18 yr of age who received a HTx between 1993 and 2009. Donor data were available for 3149 of 3156 HTx (99.8%). Donor cause of death, need for inotropes, or CPR did not affect survival outcomes (p = 0.05). Ischemic time also did not have an impact on overall recipient survival; however, longer ischemic times negatively impacted one-yr post-transplant survival (p < 0.0001). There was no impact of cumulative risk factors on survival (p = 0.8). Although used in a minority of cases, hormonal therapy in the donor positively impacted survival (p = 0.03). In multivariate analysis, the only donor factor associated with decreased survival was smaller donor BSA, the other factors being related to the recipient characteristics. When analyzed by recipient age, there were no donor-related factors that affected survival for those who received a transplant at <6 months of age. Longer ischemic time (p < 0.0001) and greater age difference between the recipient and donor (p = 0.0098) were donor-related factors impacting early-phase survival for recipients who received a graft at ≥10 yr of age. Factors perceived to define a marginal or high-risk pediatric heart donor including inotrope use, CPR and donor cause of death may have less impact on outcomes than previously thought. Longer ischemic times did impact one yr, but not overall survival, and this impact was much greater with older donors. Parameters for accepting a donor heart can potentially be expanded, especially in the infant age group, but strong consideration should always be given to the interaction between ischemic time and donor age.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".