Early and Long-Term Outcomes after Direct Bridge-to-Transplantation with Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) as direct bridge-to-transplantation (dBTT) remains controversial. We compared the short- and long-term outcomes of adult patients undergoing urgent heart transplantation (HT) with (dBTT) and without (non-BTT) VA-ECMO support at the time of HT. METHODS: Adults who underwent urgent HT in two institutions were assessed (N = 133; dBTT: N = 34 and non-BTT: N = 99). Patient characteristics, donor characteristics, in-hospital outcomes, and overall survival were compared. Mean follow up was 77±38 months and was 100% complete. Mortality predictors were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Before HT, patients with dBTT had higher rates of ischemic cardiomyopathy, acute kidney injury, liver failure, respiratory failure, and longer graft ischemia times. More patients in the dBTT group had complications, such as requiring VA-ECMO postoperatively (dBTT=50% vs. non-BTT=20%, P < 0.01). Hospital deaths (dBTT=23% vs. non-BTT=19%, P = 0.58), one-year (74% vs. 80%) and five-year survival (62% vs. 75%, P = 0.74 for overall survival) were not significantly different. The MELD-XI score and previous cardiac surgery were independent predictors of hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: Direct bridge-to-transplantation in patients on VA-ECMO support was not associated with worse long-term outcomes compared with non-VA-ECMO urgent HT, especially in recipients without any associated organ failure and a low MELD-XI score before HT.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".