Post‐pneumonectomy patients undergoing cardiac surgery: A case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data regarding post-pneumonectomy patient assessment for cardiac surgery is scarce. This retrospective study was conducted to define early and late outcomes in these patients, and to identify risk factors for poor outcomes. METHODS: This study included patients with a previous history of pneumonectomy undergoing on-pump cardiac surgery with median sternotomy. The institutional database was reviewed from 1992 to 2018. RESULTS: Sixteen post-pneumonectomy patients (all lung cancer) were identified. The age range was 53-81 years. The mean FEV1/FVC was 69%. The mean EuroSCORE II was 11.6%. Four patients had heart failure symptoms in the 2 weeks before surgery. Seven patients had isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and six patients had CABG + aortic valve replacement (AVR). The major perioperative events affecting the ease and outcomes of the surgical procedures were structural shifts (5), extensive adhesions on heart and vessels (5), and extensive calcification of heart components (5). Important postoperative complications were respiratory (7), infections (5), and acute kidney injury (5). The median hospital length of stay was 7 days. Five patients died in hospital (none with isolated CABG) with a preoperative New York Heart Association classification (NYHA) of III-IV, a cardiopulmonary bypass time of 175.2 min and an aortic cross-clamp time of 104.0 min. The long-term survival data were recorded with a mean follow-up of 7.3 ± 7.1 years (range from 0 to 19). The overall, 5-year survival, was 50% for all cardiac surgeries, 71% for isolated CABG surgeries, and 17% for CABG + AVR surgeries, respectively. CONCLUSION: Post-pneumonectomy patients have acceptable postoperative outcomes and survival. Simple and short surgeries with careful planning can yield favorable outcomes for this high-risk subgroup of 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".