MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783247357 · doi:10.1111/anae.14138

Cardiovascular complications after non‐cardiac surgery

2018· review· en· W2783247357 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Sellers, C. Srinivas, George Djaiani

Bibliographic record

VenueAnaesthesia · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiac surgeryMyocardial infarctionCardiologyInternal medicineAtrial fibrillationTroponinHeart failureAsymptomatic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac complications are common after non-cardiac surgery. Peri-operative myocardial infarction occurs in 3% of patients undergoing major surgery. Recently, however, our understanding of the epidemiology of these cardiac events has broadened to include myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery, diagnosed by an asymptomatic troponin rise, which also carries a poor prognosis. We review the causation of myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery, with potential for prevention and treatment, based on currently available international guidelines and landmark studies. Postoperative arrhythmias are also a frequent cause of morbidity, with atrial fibrillation and QT-prolongation having specific relevance to the peri-operative period. Postoperative systolic heart failure is rare outside of myocardial infarction or cardiac surgery, but the impact of pre-operative diastolic dysfunction and its ability to cause postoperative heart failure is increasingly recognised. The latest evidence regarding diastolic dysfunction and the impact on non-cardiac surgery are examined to help guide fluid management for the non-cardiac anaesthetist.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations104
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnaesthesiaSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207