Ventricular assist device support following pediatric heart transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: VAD support for early graft failure after HTx is a rare event in pediatrics. METHODS: We retrospectively describe our single-center experience with post-HTx VAD support in a cohort of patients transplanted between 01/05 and 12/20. RESULTS: Nine patients underwent VAD insertion in the early post-HTx period [median age 6.1 years (Range 0.3-20.3), median weight 17.6 kg (Range 3.5-65.0), and congenital heart disease (67%)]. Of the nine patients with early graft failure, almost half (44%) were implanted after 2015 and all of these patients had a pre-HTx plan for possible post-transplant VAD insertion. Time to VAD implant was a median of 0 day (Range 0-11). Total time on VAD support was a median of 12 days (Range 3.0-478.0). Two-thirds (n = 6; 67%) of the patients were weaned from support, retransplanted (11%) and two patients died (22%). In all of the patients where post-HTx VAD was anticipated there was 100% survival. CONCLUSIONS: In this small patient series, post-HTx VAD was a useful measure in selected patients especially with pre-HTx planning. However, more shared experiences to verify these findings are needed.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".