MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 13635: Atorvastatin for the Prevention of Major Vascular Events in Patients Undergoing Non-Cardiac Surgery: The LOAD-Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial

2015· article· en· W2885593431 on OpenAlexaff
Otávio Berwanger, Rafael Marques Soares, Dimas Ikeoka, Denise Paisani, Beatriz G Silva, Sabrina Bernardez‐Pereira, Pedro Gabriel de Melo Barros, P.J. Devereaux, Renato D. Lópes

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtorvastatinRandomized controlled trialCardiac surgeryClinical trialVascular surgeryInternal medicineCardiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: There is not a single established effective and safe intervention to prevent major perioperative vascular complications that commonly occur in the first 30 days after noncardiac surgery. Hypothesis: We evaluated the feasibility of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) testing the perioperative effects of statins. Methods: This is a double blind, placebo-controlled RCT testing a short course of atorvastatin 80mg before surgery, followed by 40mg 12 hours after surgery and then 40mg/day for 7 days in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery who were at risk of a major perioperative vascular complication. The primary outcome (major vascular events) was a composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, MINS (myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery) without myocardial infarction and nonfatal stroke at 30 days after randomization. All analysis followed the intention-to-treat principle. Results: We enrolled 587 patients from 30 centers in Brazil. Mean age was 66.6 years, 37.1% were males, 22.0% had previous cardiovascular disease, 50.2% had diabetes and 89.7 % had hypertension. The majority of participants underwent general (35.9%), orthopedic (30.0%), gynecologic (8.4%), urologic (7.3%), and vascular (6.6%) surgery. A total of 51 out of 300 patients (17.0%) suffered a major vascular complication in the atorvastatin group compared to 49 out of 287 patients (17.1%) in the control group at 30 days (hazard ratio [HR] 1,02; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 1.52; P = 0.93). No significant effect was observed on the 30-day secondary outcomes of death or myocardial infarction (8.0% versus [vs.] 7.7%, respectively; HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.70; P = 0.84), myocardial infarction (3.7% vs. 4.5%, respectively; HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.93; P = 0.68), MINS (14.0% vs.15.0%; HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.53 to 1.67; P = 0.84), and all-cause mortality (4.7% vs. 4.5%; HR 1.22; 95% CI 0.53 to 2.78; P = 0.64). Conclusions: The LOAD Trial confirms that a multicenter perioperative statin trial is feasible and highlights the need for large RCTs to establish effective and safe interventions. The study also suggests that effects of a perioperative statin on major vascular complications are, at best, moderate in size, questioning the robustness of prior data.

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)0.002
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes→French-language works237,207→