MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409737536 · doi:10.1001/jamaoto.2025.0656

Myocardial Injury After Major Head and Neck Surgery

2025· article· en· W4409737536 on OpenAlexaff
Phillip Staibano, Amit X. Garg, Matthew T.V. Chan, Carísi Anne Polanczyk, Gareth L. Ackland, S. Danielle MacNeil, Ashaka Patel, Michael Xie, Han Zhang, Michael Au, Mohit Bhandari, Sameer Parpia, Jason W. Busse, Diane Heels‐Ansdell, Benjamin van der Woerd, Michael K. Gupta, David Choi, Egehan Salepci, J. E. M. Young, P.J. Devereaux

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences CentreLawson Health Research InstituteMcMaster UniversityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeCohortIncidence (geometry)Prospective cohort studyInternal medicineCardiac surgeryCohort studySurgeryCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (MINS) is associated with increased perioperative mortality; however, the incidence and prognostic impact of MINS after major head and neck surgery remains uncertain. Objective: To determine the incidence and clinical implications of MINS in patients after major head and neck surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from the VISION (Vascular Events in Noncardiac Surgery Patients Cohort Evaluation; 2017) study, an international prospective cohort study that analyzed more than 35 000 patients who had noncardiac surgery. Of those, 648 patients (1.8%) underwent major head and neck surgery requiring at least 1-day hospital admission and screening for MINS via troponin T (TnT) concentrations measured during the first 3 postoperative days. MINS was defined as a high-sensitivity TnT (hsTnT) of 20 to 64 ng/L and absolute change more than 5 ng/L or hsTnT 65 ng/L or greater (ie, fifth-generation assay) and cardiac ischemia. When using fourth-generation assay, MINS was defined as non-hsTNT 0.04 ng/mL or greater and cardiac ischemia. Data analyses were performed from October to December 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: MINS incidence and its association with 30-day mortality. All clinical outcomes were analyzed using Cox regression models and length of hospital stay (LOHS) was analyzed using multivariable linear regression. Results: Among 648 patients (265 [40.9%] female and 383 [59.1%] male; 376 [58.0%] aged 45 to 64 years), the incidence of MINS after major head and neck surgery was 11.9% (95% CI, 9.39%-14.4%), rising to 23.8% (95% CI, 15.7%-32%) among those aged 75 years or older. MINS occurred more often in patients with medical comorbidities. The proportion of MINS that would have gone undetected without TnT monitoring was 68.8% (95% CI, 57.3%-78.9%). In this cohort, 30-day and 1-year mortality were 1.9% (95% CI, 0.8%-2.9%) and 13.1% (95% CI, 10.5%-15.7%), respectively. MINS was associated with increased 30-day mortality (hazard ratio, 5.51; 95% CI, 1.75-17.36) and prolonged LOHS in patients with MINS with at least 1 ischemic feature (adjusted β, 3.15 days; 95% CI, 1.47-6.76 days). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that myocardial injury was common among patients undergoing major head and neck surgery, especially those aged 75 years or older and those with comorbidities. Nearly 70% of MINS cases go undetected without TnT monitoring, and MINS may contribute to worse 30-day postoperative mortality and prolonged LOHS. Further prospective validation is needed to evaluate the role of MINS screening in improving clinical outcomes after major head and neck surgery.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck SurgerySame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207