Heart Transplantation in Children With Down Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Children with Down syndrome (DS) have a high risk of cardiac disease that may prompt consideration for heart transplantation (HTx). However, transplantation in patients with DS is rarely reported. This project aimed to collect and describe waitlist and post– HTx outcomes in children with DS. Methods and Results This is a retrospective case series of children with DS listed for HTx. Pediatric HTx centers were identified by their participation in 2 international registries with centers reporting HTx in a patient with DS providing detailed demographic, medical, surgical, and posttransplant outcome data for analysis. A total of 26 patients with DS were listed for HTx from 1992 to 2020 (median age, 8.5 years; 46% male). High‐risk or failed repair of congenital heart disease was the most common indication for transplant (N=18, 69%). A total of 23 (88%) patients survived to transplant. All transplanted patients survived to hospital discharge with a median posttransplant length of stay of 22 days. At a median posttransplant follow‐up of 2.8 years, 20 (87%) patients were alive, 2 (9%) developed posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder, and 8 (35%) were hospitalized for infection within the first year. Waitlist and posttransplant outcomes were similar in patients with and without DS ( P =non‐significant for all). Conclusions Waitlist and post‐HTx outcomes in children with DS selected for transplant listing are comparable to pediatric HTx recipients overall. Given acceptable outcomes, the presence of DS alone should not be considered an absolute contraindication to HTx.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".