In‐stent restenotic lesions can rupture—A case against plaque sealing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a case of plaque rupture located inside a restenotic stent. Intravascular ultrasound defined a lesion with a minimal lumen area (MLA) of 3.59 cm², plaque burden of 72%, and reference vessel luminal diameter of 4.0 mm with an external elastic membrane lumen cross-section area of 12.6 mm². There was a clearly identified plaque rupture, with a flap-like dissection within the stented segment. Virtual histology intravascular ultrasound confirmed that the adjacent plaque had necrotic core with a thin overlying fibrous cap. The remaining tissue next to the dissection plane was fibrotic. This case illustrates that neointimal hyperplasia may organize into an unstable plaque, with a thin fibrous cap overlying a lipid-rich necrotic core-a so-called virtual histology thin-capped fibroatheroma. As defined in the PROSPECT trial, the in-stent stenotic lesion in our case conformed to the definition of a high-risk plaque-it had an MLA < 4 mm², plaque burden was ≥ 70%, and there was >10% necrotic core. It became unstable and ruptured. The demonstrated findings of this case may sway physicians against sealing hemodynamically nonsignificant unstable plaques.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".