MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391106803 · doi:10.1186/s13019-024-02485-5

Risk factors for postoperative delirium in patients with Stanford type A aortic dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4391106803 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiothoracic Surgery · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNanjing Drum Tower HospitalNanjing University
KeywordsMedicineDeliriumCardiac surgeryCochrane LibraryInternal medicineAortic dissectionCardiothoracic surgeryPerioperativeMeta-analysisAbdominal surgeryCINAHLOdds ratioSurgeryIntensive care medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Delirium is a common postoperative complication among patients who undergo Stanford Type A aortic dissection (TAAD). It is associated with increased mortality, as well as other serious surgical outcomes. This study aimed to analyze the risk factors for delirium in TAAD patients. METHODS: Pubmed, Web of science, Embase, the Cochrane Library and CINAHL were searched by computer to collect literatures on risk factors for postoperative delirium (POD) after TAAD. The retrieval period was from the establishment of the database to September 2022. After literature screening, two reviewers independently assessed the quality of the included studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Data were extracted according to standard protocols, and then meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.3 software. RESULTS: A total of 9 articles, comprising 7 case-control studies and 2 cohort studies, were included in this analysis. The sample size consisted of 2035 patients. POD was associated with increased length of ICU stay (MD 3.24, 95% CI 0.18-6.31, p = 0.04) and length of hospital stay (MD 9.34, 95% CI 7.31-11.37, p < 0.0001) in TAAD patients. Various perioperative risk factors were identified, including age (MD 4.40, 95% CI 2.06-6.73, p = 0.0002), preoperative low hemoglobin levels (MD - 4.44, 95% CI - 7.67 to - 1.20, p = 0.007), body mass index (MD 0.92, 95% CI 0.22-1.63, p = 0.01), history of cardiac surgery (OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.20-7.83, p = 0.02), preoperative renal insufficiency (OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.04-6.04, p = 0.04), cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) duration (MD 19.54, 95% CI 6.34-32.74, p = 0.004), surgery duration (MD 44.88, 95% CI 5.99-83.78, p = 0.02), mechanical ventilation time (SMD 1.14, 95% CI 0.34-1.94, p = 0.005), acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) score (MD 2.67, 95% CI 0.37-4.98, p = 0.02), postoperative renal insufficiency (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.40-5.68, p = 0.004), electrolyte disturbance (OR 6.22, 95% CI 3.08-12.54, p < 0.0001) and hypoxemia (OR 3.56, 95% CI 1.70-7.44, p = 0.0007). CONCLUSIONS: POD can prolong ICU stay and hospital stay in TAAD patients. This study identified a number of risk factors for POD after TAAD, suggesting the possibility of early identification of high-risk patients using relevant data.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.007
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.308 · 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