Association of pre‐transplant blood pressure with post‐transplant outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have indicated U-shaped associations between blood pressure (BP) and mortality in dialysis patients. We hypothesized that a similar association exists between pre-transplant BP and post-transplant outcomes in dialysis patients who undergo successful kidney transplantation. METHODS: Data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients were linked to the five-yr cohort of a large dialysis organization in the United States. We identified all dialysis patients who received a kidney transplant during this period. Unadjusted and multivariate adjusted predictors of transplant outcomes were examined. RESULTS: A total of 13 881 patients included in our study were 47 ± 14 yr old and included 42% women. There was no association between pre-transplant systolic BP and post-transplant mortality, although a decreased risk trend was observed in those with low post-dialysis systolic BP. Compared to patients with pre-dialysis diastolic BP 70 to <80 mmHg, patients with pre-dialysis diastolic BP <50 mmHg experienced lower risk of post-transplant death (hazard ratios [HR]: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.55-0.99). However, compared to patients with post-dialysis diastolic BP 70 to <80 mmHg, patients with post-dialysis diastolic BP ≥100 mmHg experienced higher risk of death (HR: 3.50, 95% CI: 1.57-7.84). In addition, very low (<50 mmHg for diastolic BP and <110 mmHg for systolic BP) pre-transplant BP was associated with lower risk of graft loss. CONCLUSIONS: Low post-dialysis systolic BP and low pre-dialysis diastolic BP are associated with lower post-transplant risk of death, whereas very high post-dialysis diastolic BP is associated with higher mortality in kidney transplant recipients. BP variations in dialysis patients prior to kidney transplantation may have a bearing on post-transplant outcome, which warrants additional studies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".