Association of Preoperative Growth Differentiation Factor-15 Concentrations and Postoperative Cardiovascular Events after Major Noncardiac Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The association between growth differentiation factor-15 concentrations and cardiovascular disease has been well described. The study hypothesis was that growth differentiation factor-15 may help cardiac risk stratification in noncardiac surgical patients, in addition to clinical evaluation. METHODS: The objective of the study was to determine whether preoperative serum growth differentiation factor-15 is associated with the composite primary outcome of myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery and vascular death at 30 days and can improve cardiac risk prediction in noncardiac surgery. This is a prospective cohort study of patients 45 yr or older having major noncardiac surgery. The association between preoperative growth differentiation factor-15 and the primary outcome was determined after adjusting for the Revised Cardiac Risk Index. Preoperative N-terminal-pro hormone brain natriuretic peptide was also added to compare predictive performance with growth differentiation factor-15. RESULTS: Between October 27, 2008, and October 30, 2013, a total of 5,238 patients were included who had preoperative growth differentiation factor-15 measured (median, 1,325; interquartile range, 880 to 2,132 pg/ml). The risk of myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery and vascular death was 99 of 1,705 (5.8%) for growth differentiation factor-15 less than 1,000 pg/ml, 161 of 1,332 (12.1%) for growth differentiation factor-15 1,000 to less than 1,500 pg/ml, 302 of 1476 (20.5%) for growth differentiation factor-15 1,500 to less than 3,000 pg/ml, and 247 of 725 (34.1%) for growth differentiation factor-15 concentrations 3,000 pg/ml or greater. Compared to patients who had growth differentiation factor-15 concentrations less than 1,000 pg/ml, the corresponding adjusted hazard ratio for each growth differentiation factor-15 category was 1.93 (95% CI, 1.50 to 2.48), 3.04 (95% CI, 2.41 to 3.84), and 4.8 (95% CI, 3.76 to 6.14), respectively. The addition of growth differentiation factor-15 improved cardiac risk classification by 30.1% (301 per 1,000 patients) compared to Revised Cardiac Risk Index alone. It also provided additional risk classification beyond the combination of preoperative N-terminal-pro hormone brain natriuretic peptide and Revised Cardiac Risk Index (16.1%; 161 per 1,000 patients). CONCLUSIONS: Growth differentiation factor-15 is strongly associated with 30-day risk of major cardiovascular events and significantly improved cardiac risk prediction in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".