Percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with formerly "refractory angina pectoris in end-stage coronary artery disease" – Not "end-stage" after all
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with refractory angina pectoris in end-stage coronary artery disease represent a severe condition with a higher reduction of life-expectancy and quality of life as compared to patients with stable coronary artery disease. It was the purpose of this study to invasively re-evaluate highly symptomatic patients with formerly diagnosed refractory angina pectoris in end-stage coronary artery disease for feasible options of myocardial revascularization. METHODS: Thirty-four patients formerly characterized as having end stage coronary artery disease with refractory angina pectoris were retrospectively followed for coronary interventions. RESULTS: Of those 34 patients 21 (61.8%) were eventually revascularized with percutaneous interventional revascularization (PCI). Due to complex coronary morphology (angulation, chronic total occlusion) PCI demanded an above-average amount of time (66 +/- 42 minutes, range 25-206 minutes) and materials (contrast media 247 +/- 209 ml, range 50-750 ml; PCI guiding wires 2.0 +/- 1.4, range 1-6 wires). Of PCI patients 7 (33.3%) showed a new lesion as a sign of progression of atherosclerosis. Clinical success rate with a reduction to angina class II or lower was 71.4% at 30 days. Surgery was performed in a total of8 (23.5%) patients with a clinical success rate of 62.5%. Based on an intention-to-treat 2 patients of originally 8 (25%) demonstrated clinical success. Mortality during follow-up (1-18 months) was 4.8% in patients who underwent PCI, 25% in patients treated surgically and 25% in those only treated medically. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients with end-stage coronary artery disease can be treated effectively with conventional invasive treatment modalities. Therefore even though it is challenging and demanding PCI should be considered as a first choice before experimental interventions are considered.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".