MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3097088237 · doi:10.1093/icvts/ivaa180

Redo sternotomy versus left ventricular assist device explant as risk factors for early mortality following heart transplantation

2020· article· en· W3097088237 on OpenAlex
Roberto Vanin Pinto Ribeiro, Juglans Alvarez, Naoto Fukunaga, Frank Yu, M. Adamson, Farid Foroutan, Robert J. Cusimano, Terrence M. Yau, Heather J. Ross, Ana Carolina Alba, Filio Billia, Mitesh Badiwala, Vivek Rao

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

VenueInteractive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVentricular assist deviceHazard ratioCardiologyHeart transplantationInternal medicineTransplantationProportional hazards modelHeart failureSurgeryRetrospective cohort studyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.240 · 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