PS189 Safety and Efficacy of Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage. Single Center-initial Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) patients eligible for cardioversion tend to be younger and are at lower risk than 'general' AF clinic populations. We evaluated the incidence of major bleeding and death, as well as the predictive value of the HAS-BLED score in non-valvular AF patients who underwent electrical cardioversion (ECV).Consecutive non-valvular AF patients who underwent ECV were recruited. Major bleeding episodes and mortality were recorded. Factors associated with both endpoints and the predictive value of the HAS-BLED score were analysed.406 patients (281 males; age 66.9 ± 10.9 years) undergoing 571 ECV were included. After a follow-up of nearly 3 years, 20 patients presented with major bleeding (1.9%/year;) and 26 patients died (2.4%/year). The HAS-BLED score predicted both major bleeding [c-statistics: 0.77; 95%CI: 0.71–0.83; p < 0.001] and mortality [c-statistics: 0.83; 95%CI: 0.79–0.87; p < 0.001]. Variables associated with bleeding were: renal impairment (HR: 4.35; 95%CI: 1.22–15.52; p = 0.02), poor quality anticoagulation (HR: 3.21; 95%CI: 1.11–9.32; p = 0.03), previous bleeding-predisposition (HR: 5.43; 95%CI: 1.76–16.75; p = 0.003) and the HAS-BLED score (HR: 1.88; 95%CI: 1.34–2.64; p < 0.001). Factors associated with mortality were: age (HR: 1.08; 95%CI: 1.03–1.14; p = 0.004), poor quality anticoagulation (HR: 3.11; 95%CI: 1.15–8.36; p = 0.02), previous bleeding-predisposition (HR: 5.90; 95%CI: 1.41–24.65; p = 0.01), liver impairment (HR: 9.27; 95%CI:1.64–52.34; p = 0.01), the CHA2DS2-VASc score (HR: 1.63; 95%CI: 1.18–2.26; p = 0.003) and the HAS-BLED score (HR: 2.74; 95%CI: 1.86–4.04); p < 0.001).In AF patients undergoing ECV, major bleeding episodes and mortality were independently associated with poor quality anticoagulation control and previous bleeding-predisposition. The HAS-BLED score successfully predicted major bleeding and mortality.
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 | 0.000 | 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".