Age-Dependent Impact of Pre-Transplant Intensive Care Unit Stay on Mortality in Heart Transplant Recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Heart transplantation (HTx) is a treatment option for refractory end-stage heart failure. Severe illness requiring pre-transplant intensive care unit (ICU) stay may be a risk factor for diminished post-transplant survival, but this association is surprisingly inconsistent in recent studies. To clarify the significance of ICU stay as a risk factor for heart transplant outcomes, we aimed to define if patient age was a factor in which ICU stay was predictive of survival after HTx. Methods: De-identified data were obtained on isolated first-time HTx performed during the years 2006 - 2015 from the UNOS Registry. Nine age groups were defined. The primary outcome was 1-year post-transplant mortality. Cox proportional hazard regression estimated unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratio (HR) associated with pre-transplant ICU stay in each age group. Results: The analysis included 19,508 patients (9% deceased within 1 year). In the overall cohort, pre-transplant ICU stay was associated with increased hazard of 1-year mortality (HR = 1.3; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.2 - 1.4; P < 0.001); but further univariate analysis showed a greater hazard of 1-year mortality associated with ICU stay in infants (HR = 2.2; 95% CI: 1.5 - 3.2; P < 0.001). However, the adjusted analysis found that adults ages 40 - 49 had the highest statistically significant hazard of 1-year mortality (HR = 1.5; 95% CI: 1.1 - 2.1; P = 0.011). Conclusions: Our study established age variation in the association between ICU stay and survival after HTx, with this association being strongest among adults, 40 to 49 years of age, undergoing HTx. Previous data suggesting decreased survival in infants may be related to the increased use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a mechanical cardiac assist rather than ventricular assist devices. Cardiol Res. 2019;10(3):157-164 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/cr870
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".