MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract P324: Quality of Life Outcomes of Cardiac Surgery in Octogenarians: Comperision Between Isolated Revascularization and Aortic Valve Replacement Surgery

2011· article· en· W2460468925 on OpenAlexaff
Rakesh Chaturvedi, Sameena Iqbal, Peter Goldberg, Benoît DeVarennes, Kevin Lachapelle

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Aortic valve replacementStenosisCoronary artery diseaseRevascularizationCohortInternal medicineCardiologySurgeryValve replacementCardiac surgeryMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Aortic stenosis (AS) in octogenarians is most common and debilitating second to coronary artery disease, leading to poor quality of life (QOL). AS has higher mortality comparison to isolated revascularization (CABG) surgery. Studies indicated the benefits of both types of surgeries in octogenarians in improvement of functionality and QOL. Objective of this study was to assess long-term survival, functional status, living arrangements and QOL in the octogenarians in aortic valve and CABG surgery. Methods: Between September 2000 and September 2006, 304 consecutive patients aged 80-92 years (mean: 83.2 ± 2.8) who had CABG (196) and AVR (108) with or without CABG were identified. All survivors were followed prospectively for a mean period of 36.5 months (7-78). Their QOL and functional status was assessed by using items from the Barthel index and Karnofsky performance score. In this study we used observable descriptive measures to describe QOL (i.e. Phenomenology: the study of lived experience), in a number of domain activities of day-today life in our elderly patients. Results: Overall 30-day in-hospital mortality (CABG/AVR; n::%) rate was (24/10::12.2/9.2%). The non-adjusted survival rate was 82.7/78.2% and 72.4/66.5% at 1 and 3 years respectively. Among the 207 (136/71::69.4/65.7%) survivors from a cohort of 304, (89/44::65.4/62.0%) were autonomous, (38/18::27.9/25.4%) were semiautonomous, and 9/9::6.6/12.6%) were dependents. Among the survivors (103/47::75.7/66.2%) living in own homes, (24/15::17.6/21.1%) in residences and (9/9::6.6/12.6%) in the supervised setting. The surviving patients were involved social (133/68::97.8/95.8%), cognitive (132/68::97/95.9%), physical (126/65::92.6/91.5%), and/or volunteer and creative activities (27/18::19.8/25.3%). All survivors were cardiac symptoms free. Conclusions: Early and long-term survival in CABG and AVR group was not significantly different. More than 90% of survivors were physically active. Functional status and QOL were not significantly different in two groups. This long-term information can help when considering risks and benefits of Cardiac surgery and planning the future need for health care resources among octogenarians.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and OutcomesSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207