Redo sternotomy versus left ventricular assist device explant as risk factors for early mortality following heart transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: There is an increasing proportion of patients with a previous sternotomy (PS) or durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) undergoing heart transplantation (HT). We hypothesized that patients with LVAD support at the time of HT have a lower risk than patients with PS and may have a comparable risk to patients with a virgin chest (VC). METHODS: This is a single-centre retrospective cohort study of all adults who underwent primary single-organ HT between 2002 and 2017. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to compare 30-day and 1-year mortality between transplanted patients with a VC (VC-HT), a PS (PS-HT) or an LVAD explant (LVAD-HT). RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-nine patients were analysed (VC-HT: 196, PS-HT: 94, LVAD-HT: 89). A larger proportion of patients in the LVAD-HT group were males (83%), had blood group O (52%), non-ischaemic aetiology (70%) and sensitization (67%). The PS-HT group had a higher frequency of patients with congenital heart disease (30%) and PSs compared to LVAD-HT patients (P < 0.001). PS-HT and LVAD-HT patients required a longer bypass time (P < 0.001) and showed a greater estimated blood loss (P < 0.001). Postoperatively, LVAD-HT required haemodialysis more frequently than the VC-HT group (P = 0.031). Multivariable analyses found that PS-HT patients had increased 30-day mortality compared to VC-HT [hazard ratio (HR) 2.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-6.01; P = 0.022] while LVAD-HT did not (HR 2.17, 95% CI 0.96-4.93; P = 0.064). At 1-year, neither PS-HT nor LVAD-HT groups were significantly associated with increased mortality compared to VC-HT. CONCLUSIONS: Transplants in recipients with PS-HT demonstrated increased early mortality compared to VC-HT patients. Although LVAD explant is often technically challenging, this population demonstrated similar mortality compared to those VC-HT patients. The chronic and perioperative support provided by the LVAD may play a favourable role in early patient outcomes compared to other redo sternotomy patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".