The Canadian off-pump coronary artery bypass graft registry: a one-year prospective comparison with on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The authors sought to examine in-hospital and one-year outcomes of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and to determine the subgroups of patients most likely to benefit from the off-pump procedure in a regular surgical practice. METHODS: From March 2001 to December 2002, 1657 consecutive patients were treated with off-pump CABG and 1693 consecutive patients were treated with on-pump CABG. Propensity score modelling was performed to control for treatment and selection bias. A propensity-matched analysis was performed to identify factors associated with survival benefit from the off-pump procedure. RESULTS: The mortality was similar postoperatively and at one year after surgery. The rate of stroke was decreased in the off-pump group postoperatively (OR=0.49, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.06) and significantly at one year after surgery (OR=0.49, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.90). A significant reduction in acute renal dialysis and a significant increase in myocardial infarction rates were seen in off-pump patients during the initial hospitalization but these differences disappeared during the follow-up period. The number of grafts completed was significantly lower in off-pump CABG than in on-pump CABG (2.62+/-1.00 versus 3.36+/-0.92, respectively; P<0.001). Hospital length of stay and the percentage of patients who required mechanical ventilation were significantly lower in the off-pump group than in the on-pump group. At one year after surgery, the adjusted rate of coronary angiogram and revascularization was similar between the two groups, and the adjusted rate of self-reported angina and memory status was significantly better in the off-pump CABG group. Almost all subgroups of patients had a neutral effect or a survival benefit with the off-pump technique. CONCLUSIONS: The results from a Canada-wide multicentre registry showed the safety and effectiveness of off-pump CABG in most subgroups of patients in a regular surgical practice.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".