MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409670499 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2025.04.011

Association of Frailty With Readmissions and Outcomes After Impella Mechanical Circulatory Support

2025· article· en· W4409670499 on OpenAlexaff
M. Maffey, Adrian A. Kuchtaruk, Abdulla A. Damluji, Santiago García, Islam Y. Elgendy, Pedro Villablanca, Francesco Moroni, Martin Denicolai, Mamas A. Mamas, Rodrigo Bagur

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthJohns Hopkins UniversityPatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
KeywordsImpellaMedicineCirculatory systemAssociation (psychology)Ventricular assist deviceInternal medicineHeart failurePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Frailty is associated with a greater risk of readmission after cardiovascular procedures. However, the impact of frailty on readmission rates and outcomes after Impella mechanical circulatory support (MCS) remains unknown. We aimed to explore the impact of frailty on readmission outcomes in patients who received Impella MCS. Methods: Using the National Readmissions Database, patients aged 65 years and older who received Impella MCS between January 2016 and December 2020 were identified. Frailty was determined by the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS), which stratifies patients into 3 frailty risk categories as low (<5), intermediate (5-15), and high (>15), with intermediate- and high-risk groups defined as frail. The impact of frailty on short-term (within 30 days) and midterm (31-180 days) readmission rates and in-hospital outcomes was assessed. Results: Of the 16,289 patients identified in the 30-day cohort, 8647 (53.1%) were identified as frail (HFRS ≥5) and 2185 (13.4%) had an unplanned readmission at 30 days. After adjusting for age, sex and comorbidities, frailty status (HFRS ≥5) was associated with a greater risk of 30-day readmission (odds ratio [OR] 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17-1.37), death (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.22-3.30), major adverse events (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.29-2.33), length of stay >4 days (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.44-2.26) and greater hospitalization expenditures (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.17-1.80) during readmission. Of the 6497 patients identified in the 31-180-day cohort, 3521 (54.2%) were considered frail and 1809 (27.8%) experienced unplanned readmissions. An HFRS ≥5 was associated with a greater risk of readmission (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.88-2.34), in-hospital death (OR 3.02, 95% CI 1.33-6.86), length of stay >4 days (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.29-2.14), and greater hospital expenditures (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.05-1.75) during 31-180-day readmission. Conclusions: Frailty is common among patients undergoing Impella MCS and is associated with higher rates of readmission and adverse outcomes during readmission.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCJC OpenSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207