Low Rates of Angiographic and Clinical Restenosis with the New Flexible MedStent for the Treatment of Single Discrete Coronary Lesions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of enhanced designs of new coronary stents continues to expand the spectrum of coronary anatomy and clinical settings amenable to nonsurgical revascularization. The objectives of this clinical trial were to demonstrate the safety and late angiographic restenosis rate of the new flexible MedStent. The study included 117 patients with stable or unstable angina pectoris and a discrete de novo lesion of a native coronary artery. Procedural success, 6-month angiographic findings, and 1-year clinical outcomes were determined. The stent was successfully deployed in all but one patient (99.1%). There were no events in any of the patients within the first 2 weeks after the procedure. At 1 year, a total of 12 patients had 16 clinical events related to the stented artery (1 death, 3 non-Q-wave MIs, 10 repeat PTCAs, and 2 CABG procedures). This represents a target vessel revascularization rate (TVR) of 10.3%. The minimal luminal diameter (MLD) at 6 months for the MedStent was 2.04 +/- 0.71 mm. The 6-month binary angiographic restenosis was 20.0% (95% CI, 12.5%-27.5%). The results of the Medstent study in discrete, de novo native coronary lesions demonstrated low incidence of clinical events as well as favorable angiographic restenosis rate.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it