Timing of the first endomyocardial biopsy in heart transplantation after induction immunosuppressive therapy--experience from Canadian Heart Transplant Centre.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The exact time point at which the first endomyocardial biopsy could be safely performed after the heart transplantation has not been systematically studied. In an attempt to determine this time point in our population, the number and severity of acute rejection episodes in the first eight weeks after the heart transplantation were assessed in 91 patients who underwent the procedure at St Paul's Hospital, Vancouver between September 1996 and December 2002. METHODS AND RESULTS: For the purpose of our analysis, acute rejection was defined as the grade > or =2 according the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT). Three hundred and sixty two endomyocardial biopsies were performed in 87 patients surviving to the first biopsy from one to eight weeks after the heart transplantation. In 85 patients who received induction immunosuppressive therapy, 13 episodes of acute rejection were identified. In two patients who did not receive the induction therapy, three episodes of acute rejection occurred. Acute rejection grade ISHLT 3 was found in 2 patients who did not receive induction therapy and in three patients who did. ISHLT grade 4 rejection occurred at weeks 5 and 7 in two patients who received induction therapy. Only one patient who received induction therapy had acute rejection within the first three weeks after the heart transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis reveals that the frequency of acute rejection within the first eight weeks after the heart transplantation using induction therapy is low in this cohort, suggesting that the first routine endomyocardial biopsy could be delayed until the week four post-transplant.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".