Acute Surgical Anemia Influences the Cardioprotective Effects of β-Blockade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite decreasing cardiac events, perioperative beta-blockade also increases perioperative stroke and mortality. Major bleeding and/or hypotension are independently associated with these outcomes. To investigate the hypothesis that beta-blockade limits the cardiac reserve to compensate for acute surgical anemia, the authors examined the relationship between cardiac events and acute surgical anemia in patients with and without beta-blockade. METHODS: The records of all noncardiac, nontransplant surgical patients between March 2005 and June 2006 were retrospectively retrieved. The primary outcome was a composite that comprised myocardial infarction, nonfatal cardiac arrest, and in-hospital mortality (major adverse cardiac event). The lowest recorded hemoglobin in the first 3 days defined nadir hemoglobin. Propensity scores estimating the probability of receiving a perioperative beta-blocker were used to match (1:1) patients who did or did not receive beta-blockers postoperatively. The relationship between nadir hemoglobin and major adverse cardiac event was then assessed. RESULTS: This analysis identified 4,387 patients in whom nadir hemoglobin could be calculated; 1,153 (26%) patients were administered beta-blockers within the first 24 h of surgery. Propensity scores created 827 matched pairs that were well balanced for all measured confounders. Major adverse cardiac event occurred in 54 (6.5%) beta-blocked patients and in 25 (3.0%) beta-blocker naive patients (relative risk 2.38; 95% CI 1.43-3.96; P = 0.0009). The restricted cubic spline relationship demonstrated that this difference was restricted to those patients in whom the hemoglobin decrease exceeded 35% of the baseline value. CONCLUSIONS: beta-Blocked patients do not seem to tolerate surgical anemia when compared with patients who are naive to beta-blockers. Prospective studies are required to validate these findings.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".