Prior ischemic stroke is not associated with worse clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) frequently coexist with coronary artery disease (CAD) and adversely affect prognosis in patients with CAD; however, fewer studies have investigated the role of prior ischemic stroke on the outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The aim of this study was to determine the safety and effectiveness of PCI in patients with a prior ischemic stroke. METHODS: A review of patients who underwent PCI between June 2003 and September 2005 (n=3893) at the Beijing Anzhen Hospital of Capital University of Medical Science, identified 295 PCI patients with a prior ischemic stroke (≥ 3 months) and 3598 patients without a prior stroke. To investigate whether prior history of an ischemic stroke was independently associated with increased risk of adverse PCI outcomes, prognostic parameters were analyzed using univariate analysis and Cox multivariate regression analysis. Propensity score analysis was then used to match the two subgroups of patients based on multiple factors known to impact cardiac outcome. RESULTS: Patients with a prior ischemic stroke had more frequent high-risk baseline characteristics (diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia and prior myocardial infarction). No significant differences were found in the major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCEs) rates between the two groups (1.7% in the stroke group vs. 1.4% in the non-stroke group; p=0.06). Diabetes mellitus, triple vessel CAD, number of diseased vessels, chronic total occlusion and previous myocardial infarction were independent predictors of MACCE in patients with prior stroke undergoing PCI. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that, in daily clinical practice, PCI can be provided safely and with good results to patients with a prior ischemic stroke (≥ 3 months).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".