MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1593306595 · doi:10.1002/ccd.25611

Chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention case selection and techniques for the antegrade‐only operator

2014· review· en· W1593306595 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Rinfret, Dominique Joyal, James Spratt, Christopher E. Buller

Bibliographic record

VenueCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalMcGill UniversityJewish General HospitalUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneous coronary interventionPercutaneousCoronary angiographyRadiologySelection (genetic algorithm)Interventional cardiologySurgeryCardiologyMyocardial infarctionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coronary chronic total occlusions (CTO) remain a difficult lesion subset to treat. Although CTOs are present at coronary angiography in 15-20% of patients, only a small fraction of eligible patients will be offered percutaneous treatment. Recent publications from centers with dedicated CTO programs using the full range of antegrade and retrograde techniques suggest success rates in the range of 90% even when little anatomic exclusion are used. However, many patients with clinically appropriate CTO targets have simpler anatomy that can predictably be managed without the selected skills and equipment. The purpose of this review is to provide skilled percutaneous coronary intervention operators who have not specialized in complex retrograde CTO techniques, an algorithm for the selection and antegrade management of appropriate CTO cases. Core equipment and techniques are discussed.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations31
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatheterization and Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207