P100 Prospective mid-term assessment of frailty in patients implanted with left ventricular assist devices- any reversibility within different domains?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The coalescence of the frailty phenotype and advanced heart failure (HF) presents a unique opportunity to assess any LVAD mediated improvement of cardiac output that may potentially improve the slowness, weakness, fatigue, weight loss and physical inactivity that comprise the frailty phenotype. We sought to determine whether implantation of LVAD could improve frailty in Chinese population. Methods From March 2015 to May 2018, 24 patients (pts) with advanced HF underwent LVAD implantation and 16 pts who remained on LVAD support for 18 months were assessed serially every six months. A new multi-disciplinary objective assessment of frailty with relevance to local Chinese population was designed to enable serial reassessment of patient’s clinical progress. The total maximum scores ranged from 0-7 [1. Physical score 0-5 namely exhaustion, poor appetite, weak hand grip, 6 minute hall walk test <400m and reduced physical activity; 2. Cognitive (Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Hong Kong) <22= 1; 3. Depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) > = 1]. Results During the period studied, 5 pts received heart transplantation and 3 pts died. Mean age of remaining 16 pts (94% men) was 53 ± 13 years old. There was significant reduction in total frailty score mainly driven by significant reduction in physical domain. However, frailty was only completely reversible in 8 pts (50%). Improvement in frailty post LVAD were not associated with significant differences in measures of mood or cognition. (Figure 1) Conclusions The components of the frailty phenotype in pts with post LVAD surgery all have significant improvements. Absences of any association between improvements in the frailty phenotype and mood or cognition warranted further focused attention in the rehabilitation program for LVAD pts. Abstract P100 Figure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".