Predicting outcomes following short‐term ventricular assist device implant with the <scp>MELD‐XI</scp> score
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Short-term continuous flow (STCF) ventricular assist devices (VADs) are utilized in adults with cardiogenic shock; however, mortality remains high. Previous studies have found that high pre-operative MELD-XI scores in durable VAD patients are associated with mortality. The use of the MELD-XI score to predict outcomes in STCF-VAD patients has not been explored. We sought to determine the relationship between MELD-XI and outcomes in adults with STCF-VADs. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of adults implanted with STCF-VADs between 2009 and 2019. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to predict outcomes and Kaplan-Meier analysis was done to assess survival. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients were included with a median MELD-XI score of 21.2 (IQR 13.5, 27.0). Patients with an unsuccessful wean from support (p < 0.001) or major post-operative bleeding (p = 0.03) had significantly higher pre-implant MELD-XI scores. The optimal MELD-XI cut-point for mortality was 24.9 with 27.8 for major bleeding. Survival was worse among patients in the high-risk MELD-XI group, however, not statistically significant (p = 0.09). Prior ECMO support, but not MELD-XI, was an independent predictor of unsuccessful wean (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operative MELD-XI score was a moderate predictor of unsuccessful wean with limited utility in predicting bleeding in patients on STCF-VAD support. This scoring system may be useful in the clinical setting for pre-implant risk stratification and counseling among patients and outcomes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".