MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2517471402 · doi:10.14740/cr480w

Predictors of Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Valve Surgery in Adult Patients in Current Surgical Era

2016· article· en· W2517471402 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bandar Al‐Ghamdi, Yaseen Mallawi, Azam Shafquat, Alexandra Ledesma, Nadiah Alruwaili, Mohamed M. Shoukri, Shahid Khan, Aly Al Sanei

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studyMitral valve replacementCardiac surgeryAtrial fibrillationSurgeryAortic valve replacementAtrioventricular blockCoronary artery diseaseArteryMitral valveStenosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation after cardiac surgery is required in 0.4-6% of patients depending on cardiac surgery type. PPM implantation in the early postoperative period may reduce morbidity and postoperative hospital stay. We performed a retrospective review of electronic medical records of adult patients with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), valve surgery, or both, over a 3-year period. Our aim was to identify predictors of PPM requirements and PPM dependency on follow-up in the current surgical era. METHODS: After exclusion of patients with congenital heart disease, patients who already had a PPM or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), and patients with an indication for PPM or ICD before surgery, we identified 1,234 adult patients who underwent cardiac surgery between January 2007 and December 2009. A retrospective review of electronic medical records and pacemaker clinic data was performed. RESULTS: Patients' mean age was 46.65 ± 16 years, and 59% were males. CABG was performed in 575 (46.6%) cases, aortic valve replacement in 263 (21.3%), mitral valve replacement in 333 (27%), and tricuspid valve replacement in 76 patients (6.2%). Twenty patients (1.6%) required implantation of a PPM postoperatively. Indications for PPM implantation included complete atrioventricular (AV) block in 13 (65%), sick sinus syndrome in three (15%), and atrial fibrillation (AF) with a slow ventricular rate in four (20%). Predictors for PPM requirement by multivariate analysis were the presence of pulmonary hypertension (P-HTN), reoperation, and left bundle branch block (LBBB) (P < 0.05). Late follow-up was available in 18 patients, at 84.5 ± 30 months. Eleven patients (61%) were PPM dependent on long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Patients at high risk for PPM implantation after cardiac surgery include those with P-HTN, reoperation, and pre-existing LBBB. Of those receiving a PPM, about one-third will recover at least partially at long-term follow-up. We recommend preoperative assessment for risk of requiring postoperative PPM, to counsel patients about this risk and early PPM implantation in high-risk patients who are PPM dependent after surgery.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations32
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology ResearchSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207