MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4292623263 · doi:10.1101/2022.08.21.22279032

The Association of Postoperative Anaemia with Outcomes in Cardiac Surgical Patients Eligible for Patient Blood Management: A Single Institution Retrospective Cohort Study

2022· preprint· en· W4292623263 on OpenAlexaff
Justyna Bartoszko, Michelle Li, Jeannie Callum, Sujung Yi, Maral Ouzounian, Stuart A. McCluskey, Sarah Miles, Yulia Lin, Keyvan Karkouti

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood transfusion and management
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreKingston Health Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreSinai Health SystemQueen's UniversityWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyAnemiaAcute kidney injuryBlood transfusionSurgeryCohortHemoglobinInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background Anaemia is prognostically important and affects 30-40% of cardiac surgical patients. The objective of this study was to examine the association of pre- and postoperative anaemia with outcomes in cardiac surgical patients. Methods This was a single-institution retrospective cohort study including cardiac surgical patients from October 26, 2020 to December 3, 2021. Patients were classified as preoperatively non-anaemic (hemoglobin ≥ 130 g/L), anaemic, or treated with IV Iron. The main predictors of interest were nadir haemoglobin on postoperative days 1-2 and preoperative anaemia and receipt of IV iron therapy. The primary outcome was number of red blood cell units (RBC) transfused on postoperative days 1-7. Secondary outcomes included acute kidney injury, hospital length of stay, and 30 day in-hospital mortality. Regression models, adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, and surgical characteristics, examined the association between predictors and outcomes. Results A total of 844 patients were included [528 (63%) non-anaemic, 276 (33%) anaemic, and 40 (5%) anaemic, treated with IV iron]. There was no difference between groups in RBC transfusion or mortality, however anaemic patients had a higher adjusted risk for acute kidney injury [aOR 2.69 (95% CI, 1.37 to 5.30), p=0.004] and longer hospital length of stay [aRR 1.38 (95% CI, 1.24 to 1.54), p<0.0001] compared to non-anaemic patients. Patients treated with IV iron did not have the same increased risk. A lower postoperative haemoglobin nadir was significantly associated with increased risk for all outcomes. Conclusions Postoperative anaemia confers additional risk regardless of preoperative anaemia status. Further research is needed to better clarify these associations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicBlood transfusion and management→French-language works237,207→