Association of Testosterone Replacement Therapy and the Incidence of a Composite of Postoperative In-hospital Mortality and Cardiovascular Events in Men Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Whether patients on testosterone replacement therapy undergoing noncardiac surgery have an increased risk of postoperative in-hospital mortality and cardiovascular events remains unknown. We therefore sought to identify the impact of testosterone replacement on the incidence of a composite of postoperative in-hospital mortality and cardiovascular events in men undergoing noncardiac surgery. METHODS: Data from male American Society of Anesthesiologists I through IV patients 40 yr or older who underwent noncardiac surgery between May 2005 and December 2015 at the Cleveland Clinic (Cleveland, Ohio) main campus were included. The primary exposure was preoperative testosterone use. The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative in-hospital mortality and cardiovascular events. We compared patients who received testosterone and those who did not using propensity score matching within surgical procedure matches. RESULTS: Among 49,273 patients who met inclusion and exclusion criteria, 947 patients on testosterone were matched to 4,598 nontestosterone patients. The incidence of in-hospital mortality was 1.3% in the testosterone group and 1.1% in the nontestosterone group, giving an odds ratio of 1.17 (99% CI, 0.51 to 2.68; P = 0.63). The incidence of myocardial infarction was 0.2% in the testosterone group and 0.6% in the nontestosterone group (odds ratio = 0.34; 99% CI, 0.05 to 2.28; P = 0.15). Similarly, no significant difference was found in stroke (testosterone vs. nontestosterone: 2.0% vs. 2.1%), pulmonary embolism (0.5% vs. 0.7%), or deep venous thrombosis (2.0% vs. 1.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative testosterone is not associated with an increased incidence of a composite of postoperative in-hospital mortality and cardiovascular events.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".