Mid-term results after extensive vein patch reconstruction and internal mammary grafting of the diffusely diseased left anterior descending coronary artery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the results of extensive reconstruction of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) by an autologous vein patch, with or without endarterectomy (EA), associated with left internal mammary artery grafting onto the patch. METHODS: Between January 1994 and April 2001, among 5871 myocardial revascularizations, 83 patients (1.4%), 77 male (93%), with a mean age+/-SD of 64+/-8 years (range 44-84) underwent the above mentioned procedure. Seventy-three of them (88%) were in Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Class III or IV, and 78 (94%) had a three-vessel disease. Mean preoperative ejection fraction was 58+/-12%. Risk factors included hypertension (63%), family history (51%), hyperlipidemia (41%), smoking (38%), diabetes (19%). Mean number of anastomoses/patient was 3+/-0.6. Mean length of vein patch was 2.8+/-0.9 cm (range 2-6 cm). A total of 16% of the patients underwent associated LAD-EA (mean cardiopulmonary bypass time: 132+/-21 min; mean aortic crossclamp time: 81+/-15 min). RESULTS: There was one hospital death (recurrent MI, 1.2%). Seven patients (8%) had a perioperative myocardial infarction, in three cases in the region supplied by the LAD (none after associated LAD-EA). Mean follow-up period was 47+/-20 months (range 5-90) and is 99% complete. There were five late cardiac deaths (6%). A total of 74% survivors have no symptoms, 12% are in CCS Class I-II, and 14% in III-IV. Actuarial freedom from recurrent angina at 3 and 5 years is 77 and 69%, respectively. Follow-up angiograms (49 patients, 60%) revealed a full patent LAD graft in 82% of the cases (GI), versus poor run-off/occluded graft in the remaining 18% (GII). Anginal status was significantly worse in GII patients (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Extended reconstruction of the LAD coronary artery increases surgical risk. The procedure however enhances the probability for a complete revascularization in patients with an unfavourable anatomical substrate, with acceptable mid-term results.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".