MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082349393 · doi:10.2459/jcm.0000000000001097

Bridge to heart transplantation in patients with cardiogenic shock: a 20-year experience with two different surgical strategies

2020· article· en· W3082349393 on OpenAlex
Sandro Sponga, A. Dave Nagpal, Igor Vendramin, Veronica Ferrara, Andrea Lechiancole, Massimo Maiani, Chiara Nalli, Concetta Di Nora, G. Guzzi, Nunzio Davide de Manna, Uberto Bortolotti, Ugolino Livi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiogenic shockMedicineTransplantationExtracorporealHeart transplantationExtracorporeal membrane oxygenationLife supportCirculatory systemMechanical ventilationCardiologyDialysisHeart failureShock (circulatory)Internal medicineSurgeryMyocardial infarctionIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: We aimed to describe how treatment of patients in cardiogenic shock bridged to heart transplantation with mechanical circulatory support, using either biventricular assist devices (BVADs) or extracorporeal life support (ECLS), has evolved in the last 20 years in our centre. METHODS: Since 1998, 72 patients with refractory heart failure and indication for heart transplantation have received mechanical circulatory support: 40 had an ECLS system and 32 a BVAD. RESULTS: Early mortality was similar (17.5 vs. 9.4%, P = 0.25) regardless of the type of support. After a median support time of 8 (1-27) vs. 34 (0-385) days (P < 0.01), 70 vs. 65.6% (P = 0.69) of patients underwent transplantation in the two groups. Prior to transplantation, BVAD patients were more stable with lower need for mechanical ventilation (9 vs. 57%, P < 0.01) and dialysis (0 vs. 38%, P < 0.01). Thirty-day mortality after transplantation was similar (18 vs. 14%, P = 0.53). Patients with extracorporeal support had higher rates of renal (P = 0.02) and respiratory failure (P = 0.03), infections (P = 0.02), atrial fibrillation (P = 0.03) and longer ICU stay (P = 0.01). Late survival was similar, while 5-year freedom from coronary vasculopathy was higher in those with BVAD (P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Although ECLS provides faster and simpler assistance compared with BVADs, no differences in early and medium-term outcomes in the last 20 years were observed in patients with cardiogenic shock. However, BVADs provided longer duration of support, better multiorgan recovery allowing more adequate graft selection, resulting in a lower rate of posttransplant complications.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.526
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.209 · 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