Heart or heart-lung transplantation for patients with congenital heart disease in England
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increased longevity in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) is associated with late complications, mainly heart failure, which may not be amenable to redo surgery and become refractory to medical therapy and so, trigger referral for transplantation. We assessed the current role and future prospects of heart and heart-lung transplantation for patients with CHD in England. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of hospital episodes for England for 1997-2015, identifying patients with a CHD code (ICD-10 'Q2xx.x'), who underwent heart or heart-lung transplantation. RESULTS: In total, 469 transplants (82.2% heart and 17.8% heart-lung) were performed in 444 patients. Half of patients transplanted had mild or moderate CHD complexity, this percentage increased with time (p=0.001). While overall, more transplantations were performed over the years, the proportion of heart-lung transplants declined (p<0.0001), whereas the proportion of transplants performed in adults remained static. Mortality was high during the first year, especially after heart-lung transplantation, but remained relatively low thereafter. Older age and heart-lung transplantation were strong predictors of death. While an increase in CHD transplants is anticipated, actual numbers in England seem to lag behind the increase in CHD patients with advanced heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: The current and future predicted increase in the numbers of CHD transplants does not appear to parallel the expansion of the CHD population, especially in adults. Further investment and changes in policy should be made to enhance the number of donors and increase CHD transplant capacity to address the increasing numbers of potential CHD recipients and optimise transplantation outcomes in this growing population.
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) | 0.001 | 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".