Femoral Vein Pulsatility and Neurocognitive Disorder in Cardiac Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Neurocognitive disorder and venous congestion are related in cardiac surgery. Femoral vein (FV) Doppler allows noninvasive assessment of venous congestion. This study aims to associate postoperative neurocognitive disorder in cardiac surgery with FV pulsatility. Method: A secondary analysis was conducted using data from retrospective and prospective cohorts. FV Doppler and neurocognitive disorder were measured upon admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) after surgery. An index of FV pulsatility of ≥ 50% was considered abnormal. The presence of neurocognitive disorder was assessed using the Intensive Care Delirium Score Checklist (ICDSC). Descriptive statistical analyses and logistic regression were used to test the association between FV Doppler pulsatility and neurocognitive disorder. Results: A total of 273 patients from both cohorts were analyzed, 155 (57%) patients had FV pulsatility indexes ≥ 50%. Abnormal pulsatile Doppler was associated with the presence of neurocognitive disorder compared with normal FV Doppler profile (57 vs 43%, odds ratio [OR], 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-2.81). FV pulsatility was also associated with age, higher rate of stroke, prolongation of intubation duration and a longer ICU stay. Conclusions: FV pulsatility is associated with the presence of neurocognitive disorder and postoperative complications in cardiac surgery. The FV Doppler technique is simple and fast, offering the potential to anticipate complications related to venous congestion, such as delirium. Future multicentre studies with larger samples will be necessary to consolidate these findings. Clinical Registration Number: NCT04092855 and NCT05038267.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".