Post-Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Cognitive Decline: Risk Modification And Implications For Screening In Low-Risk Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background — Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is an important complication of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Large amount of data points to the problem of POCD in patients with high surgical risk of CABG. Low-risk patients are not safe from these complications either. Assessment of the severity, duration of POCD, degree of recovery and risk factors in off- and on-pump patients with stable coronary artery disease is crucial in minimization of the POCD risk in patients with low surgical risk. Objective — to analyze incidence, severity, reversibility and risk factors of POCD in patients undergoing elective low-risk CABG. Methods and Results — The retrospective cohort study included 79 patients who underwent on-pump (N=44) or off-pump (N=35) elective CABG with low surgical risk (mean EuroSCORE II death risk 1.08±0.71%), with observation period of 6 months. Pre-CABG markers of cognitive impairment were found in 50% of patients, with 44% of patients demonstrating POCD. Patients who underwent off-pump CABG demonstrated more pronounced decline in MoCA score compared to on-pump (-3.9±2.0 vs. -2.2±2.0 at 8 days point, p=0.018), with regress to pre-CABG results after 3 weeks. Baseline MoCA score <25 was found to be a predictor for more pronounced cognitive decline at 8 days point. MMSE demonstrated less predictive value compared to MoCA. Conclusion — POCD risk differs in off-pump and on-pump CABG cohorts, with significantly higher prevalence in the former group, whether assessed using MMSE or MoCA tests. Differences are observed within 3 weeks post-CABG. Pre-CABG MoCA score <25 is associated with more pronounced POCD in low-risk elective CABG cohort.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".