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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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