Evolution of Early Postoperative Cardiac Rehabilitation in Patients with Acute Type A Aortic Dissection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Surgically treated acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) patients are often restricted from physical exercise due to a lack of knowledge about safe blood pressure (BP) ranges. The aim of this study was to describe the evolution of early postoperative cardiac rehabilitation (CR) for patients with ATAAD. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 73 patients with ATAAD who were referred to the CR department after surgery. An incremental symptom-limited exercise stress test (ExT) on a cyclo-ergometer was performed before and after CR, which included continuous training and segmental muscle strengthening (five sessions/week). Systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) were monitored before and after all exercise sessions. RESULTS: The patients (78.1% male; 62.2 ± 12.7 years old; 54.8% hypertensive) started CR 26.2 ± 17.3 days after surgery. During 30.4 ±11.6 days, they underwent 14.5 ± 4.7 sessions of endurance cycling training, and 11.8 ± 4.3 sessions of segmental muscle strengthening. At the end of CR, the gain of workload during endurance training and functional capacity during ExT were 19.6 ± 10.2 watts and 1.2 ± 0.6 METs, respectively. The maximal BP reached during endurance training was 143 ± 14/88 ± 14 mmHg. The heart rate (HR) reserve improved from 20.2 ± 13.9 bpm to 33.2 ± 16.8 bpm while the resting HR decreased from 86.1 ± 17.4 bpm to 76.4 ± 13.3 bpm. CONCLUSION: Early post-operative exercise-based CR is feasible and safe in patients with surgically treated ATAAD. The CR effect is remarkable, but it requires a close BP monitoring and supervision by a cardiologist and physical therapist during training.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".