MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409381245 · doi:10.1093/ehjopen/oeaf033

Post-cardiac surgery atrial fibrillation and sex differences in clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4409381245 on OpenAlexaff
Faith Michael, Travis Quevillon, Suzanne Betteridge-LeBlanc, Mustafa Alzahran, Rafael Shehata, Cynthia A. Jackevicius, Rony Atoui, Bindu Bittira, Tina Baykaner, Paula Harvey, Ratika Parkash, Jeff S. Healey, Dennis T. Ko, Mohammed Shurrab

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal Open · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences NorthUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreMcMaster UniversityQueen's UniversityWomen's College HospitalNOSM UniversityKingston General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationMeta-analysisInternal medicineMedicineCardiologyCardiac surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract There is conflicting literature on sex differences and clinical outcomes in patients who develop atrial fibrillation (AF) post-cardiac surgery. Our aim was to compare clinical outcomes between females and males with post-cardiac surgery AF. A systematic search was conducted for studies published until 27 September 2024 in MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL. Included studies compared mortality and stroke in females vs. males who developed AF after cardiac surgery. Outcomes of interest were mortality and stroke. Pooled prevalence was used to compare comorbidities. Raw event rates were used to calculate odds ratios (ORs), which were pooled with a fixed-effects model. 10 422 studies were identified and 5 studies met inclusion criteria. 14 970 patients who developed AF after cardiac surgery were included, of whom 3748 were females. The length of follow-up was up to 10 years. The weighted average age was 70.4 ± 2.9 years in females and 66.7 ± 2.4 years in males (P = 0.32). At baseline, females had a higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, stroke, and peripheral vascular disease. The odds of in-hospital mortality among females were higher compared to males (5.5 vs. 3.0%; OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.42–2.91, P < 0.001, I2 = 57%). There were no significant differences in post-discharge mortality (45.6 vs. 42.9%; OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.97–1.15, P = 0.23, I2 = 0%) or in-hospital stroke (2.5 vs. 1.9%; OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.79–2.13, P = 0.30, I2 = 57%) in females vs. males. In conclusion, females with post-cardiac surgery AF had a higher prevalence of comorbidities at baseline. The odds of in-hospital mortality were twice as high among females. There were no significant differences in post-discharge mortality or in-hospital stroke. Future studies are warranted to understand the mechanisms of increased in-hospital mortality in females and to develop effective monitoring strategies and interventions.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.031
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal OpenSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207