MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201310084 · doi:10.1161/jaha.121.021973

Outcomes of Elderly Patients Undergoing Left Atrial Appendage Closure

2021· article· en· W3201310084 on OpenAlexaff
Shubrandu Sanjoy, Yun‐Hee Choi, Robert T. Sparrow, Hani Jneid, J. Dawn Abbott, Luis Nombela‐Franco, Lorenzo Azzalini, David R. Holmes, M. Chadi Alraies, Islam Y. Elgendy, Adrián Baranchuk, Mamas A. Mamas, Rodrigo Bagur

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's UniversityLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationHeart failureDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineStroke (engine)AnemiaOdds ratioCardiologySurgeryPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Elderly patients have a higher burden of comorbidities that influence clinical outcomes. We aimed to compare in‐hospital outcomes in patients ≥80 years old to younger patients, and to determine the factors associated with increased risk of major adverse events (MAE) after left atrial appendage closure. Methods and Results The National Inpatient Sample was used to identify discharges after left atrial appendage closure between October 2015 and December 2018. The primary outcome was in‐hospital MAE defined as the composite of postprocedural bleeding, vascular and cardiac complications, acute kidney injury, stroke, and death. A total of 6779 hospitalizations were identified, of which, 2371 (35%) were ≥80 years old and 4408 (65%) were <80 years old. Patients ≥80 years old experienced a higher rate of MAE compared with those aged <80 years old (6.0% versus 4.6%, P =0.01), and this difference was driven by a numerically higher rate of cardiac complications (2.4% versus 1.8%, P =0.09) and death (0.3% versus 0.1%, P =0.05) among individuals ≥80 years old. In patients ≥80 years old, higher odds of in‐hospital MAE were observed in women (1.61‐fold), and those with preprocedural congestive heart failure (≈2‐fold), diabetes (≈1.5‐fold), renal disease (≈2.6‐fold), anemia (≈2.7‐fold), and dementia (≈5‐fold). In patients <80 years old, a higher risk of in‐hospital MAE was encountered among women (≈1.4‐fold) and those with diabetes (≈1.3‐fold), renal disease (≈2.6‐fold), anemia (≈2‐fold), and dyslipidemia (≈1.2‐fold). Conclusions Patients ≥80 years old had higher rates of in‐hospital MAE compared with patients aged <80 years old. Female sex and the presence of heart failure, diabetes, renal disease, and anemia were factors associated with in‐hospital MAE among both groups.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart AssociationSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207