Evaluation of the Management of Hyperlipidemia and Hypertension in an Outpatient Cardiac Transplant Clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Allograft coronary artery disease (ACAD) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality post-orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT). ACAD progression may be reduced by modifying cardiovascular risk factors, such as hyperlipidemia and hypertension. We sought to evaluate the management of hyperlipidemia and hypertension among OHT recipients followed in an outpatient cardiac transplant clinic. Objective: The primary objective was to assess the proportion of OHT patients achieving both the recommended LDL target of <2.0 mmol/L and BP targets of <140/90 mmHg (or <130/80 mmHg for diabetics) in an outpatient cardiac transplant clinic. Methods: A cross-sectional retrospective analysis of the medical records of all adult OHT recipients actively followed in our outpatient cardiac transplant between January-March 2009. Results: Of the 193 patients included, both the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and blood pressure (BP) targets were achieved in 111 (57.5%) patients. The LDL target alone was achieved by 140 (72.5%) patients and the BP target alone by 153 (79.3%) patients. Statins were prescribed in 183 (94.8%) patients with a mean LDL of 1.81 mmol/L (±0.55). Angiotensin converting enzyme-inhibitors [ACE-I] (or angiotensin receptor blockers [ARB]) were prescribed in 154 (79.8%) patients, diltiazem in 101 (52.3%) patients, and both in 85 (44.0%) patients, with a mean BP of 124.2/77.8 mmHg (±13.6/8.2). Adverse reactions related to statins, ACE-inhibitors or diltiazem were uncommon and rarely resulted in drug discontinuation. Conclusions: Guideline recommended that LDL and BP targets are achievable in a significant proportion of OHT recipients. The high utilization rates of statins for dyslipidemia and ACE-I (or ARB) and diltiazem for BP were consistent with guideline recommendations for the prevention of ACAD. Despite concerns regarding the potential for pharmacokinetic drug interactions in OHT patients, the reported rates of any drug intolerance to these medications were low in our population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".