MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991610257 · doi:10.1139/cjpp-2013-0445

Coronary artery bypass graft: why is the saphenous vein prone to intimal hyperplasia?

2014· review· en· W1991610257 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Swastika Sur, Jeffrey T. Sugimoto, Devendra K. Agrawal

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineIntimal hyperplasiaRestenosisCardiologyArteryVeinLumen (anatomy)Internal medicineNeointimal hyperplasiaSmooth muscleStent

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proliferation and migration of smooth muscle cells and the resultant intimal hyperplasia cause coronary artery bypass graft failure. Both internal mammary artery and saphenous vein are the most commonly used bypass conduits. Although an internal mammary artery graft is immune to restenosis, a saphenous vein graft is prone to develop restenosis. We found significantly higher activity of phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) in the smooth muscle cells of the internal mammary artery than in the saphenous vein. In this article, we critically review the pathophysiology of vein-graft failure with detailed discussion of the involvement of various factors, including PTEN, matrix metalloproteinases, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases, in uncontrolled proliferation and migration of smooth muscle cells towards the lumen, and invasion of the graft conduit. We identified potential target sites that could be useful in preventing and (or) reversing unwanted consequences following coronary artery bypass graft using saphenous vein.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations39
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207