MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1868241540 · doi:10.1002/ccd.26026

One‐year clinical outcomes after sirolimus‐eluting coronary stent implantation in diabetics enrolled in the worldwide e‐<scp>SELECT</scp> registry

2015· article· en· W1868241540 on OpenAlexaff
Antonio L. Bartorelli, Gabriele Egidy Assenza, Alexandre Abizaid, Adrian Banning, Vladimír Džavík, Stephen G. Ellis, David R. Holmes, Myung Ho Jeong, Victor Legrand, Franz–Josef Neumann, Christian Spaulding, Stephen G. Worthley, Philip Urban

Bibliographic record

VenueCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
FundersCordis
KeywordsMedicineMacePercutaneous coronary interventionDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseIncidence (geometry)StentCardiologyRestenosisSurgeryMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus has worse outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention. AIM: We assessed stent thrombosis (ST), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and major bleeding rates at 1 year after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in patients with diabetes mellitus in a large multicenter registry. METHODS: From May 2006 to April 2008, 15,147 unselected consecutive patients were enrolled at 320 centers in 56 countries in a prospective, observational registry after implantation of ≥ 1 SES. Source data were verified in 20% randomly chosen patients at > 100 sites. Adverse events were adjudicated by an independent Clinical Event Committee. RESULTS: Complete follow-up at 1 year was obtained in 13,693 (92%) patients, 4,577 (30%) of whom were diabetics. Within diabetics, 1,238 (9%) were insulin-treated diabetics (ITD). Diabetics were older (64 vs. 62 years, P < 0.001), with higher incidence of major coronary risk factors, co-morbidities, and triple-vessel coronary artery disease. Coronary lesions had smaller reference vessel diameter (2.88 ± 0.46 vs. 2.93 ± 0.45 mm, P < 0.001) and were more often heavily calcified (26.1% vs. 22.6%, P < 0.001). At 1 year, diabetics had higher MACE rate (6.8% vs. 3.9%, P < 0.001) driven by ITD (10.6% vs. 5.5%, P < 0.001). Finally, diabetics had significant increase in ST (1.7% vs. 0.7%, P < 0.001), principally owing to ITD (3.4% vs. 1.1%, P < 0.001). There was an overall low risk of major bleeding during follow-up, without significant difference among subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In the e-SELECT registry, diabetics represented 30% of patients undergoing SES implantation and had significantly more co-morbidities and complex coronary lesions. Although 1-year follow-up documented good overall outcome in diabetics, higher ST and MACE rates were observed, mainly driven by ITD. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.632

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.268 · 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.

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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