Pediatric heart transplantation: Looking forward after five decades of learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart transplantation has become the standard of care for pediatric patients with end-stage heart disease throughout the world. Since the first transplant was performed in 1967, the number of transplants has grown dramatically with 13 449 pediatric heart transplants being reported to The International Society of Heart and Lung Transplant (ISHLT) between January 1992 and June 30, 2018. Outcomes have consistently improved over the last few decades, specifically short-term outcomes. Most recent survival data demonstrate that recipients who survive to 1-year post-transplant have excellent long-term survival with more than 60% of those who were transplanted as infants being alive 25 years later. Nonetheless, the rates of graft loss beyond the first year have remained relatively constant over time; driven primarily by our poor understanding and lack of treatments for chronic allograft vasculopathy (CAV). Acute rejection, CAV, graft failure, and infection continue to be the major causes of death within the first 5 years post-transplant. In addition, renal dysfunction, malignancy, and the need for re-transplantation remain as significant issues that require close follow-up. Looking forward, key challenges include improving donor utilization rates (including donation after cardiac death (DCD) and the use of ex vivo perfusion devices), the development of non-invasive biomarkers for rejection, efforts to mitigate the long-term effects of immunosuppression, and prevention of CAV. It is not possible to cover the entire evolution of pediatric heart transplantation over the last five decades, but in this review, we hope to touch on key observations, lessons learned, and practice changes that have advanced the field, as well as glance ahead to the next decade.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".