Coronary Endarterectomy on Beating Heart: Is It Worth Doing?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Management of patients with severely impaired left ventricular function (LVF) associated with diffusely atheromatous coronary artery disease is a real dilemma. Coronary revascularization can be done only after endarterectomy to facilitate anastomosis. The aim of the present work is to present our experience and see whether performing endarterectomy during off-pump bypass can be of any benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five patients with a mean ejection fraction of 27 +/- 4.5 underwent coronary revascularization facilitated by endarterectomy using off-pump technique. There were three males and two females with a mean age of 64.4 +/- 7.4 years. All patients were in NYHA class III or IV. Close endarterectomy was done to left anterior descending artery (LAD), right coronary artery (RCA), and intermediate artery. RESULTS: All patients survived the procedure. A total of seven closed endarterectomies were performed. Five of these were done on LAD and the other two were done on RCA and intermediate artery. Two patients (40%) received inotropic support. One patient had perioperative infarction (20%). Mean follow-up period was 14.2 months +/- 19.7 (range, 1 month to 48 months). All patients were free of angina according to Canadian Cardiovascular Society and were in class NYHA I or II except one, who was in class III. Postoperative catheterization showed that all bypasses to endarterectomized arteries were patent. Patency rate was 83.4%. The mean postoperative ejection fraction was 29.8 +/- 6.9, which was not significantly different from preoperative one (p= 0.12). CONCLUSION: Performing endarterectomy on beating heart in patients with compromised left ventricle is not an easy task. But it can be done with difficulty. Although the procedure is associated with high incidence of infarction, our early results, follow-up clinical status, and graft patency justify its use among patients with compromised left ventricular function who were previously considered inoperable.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".