Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Ischemic mitral regurgitation (MR) is a common finding in patients with coronary artery disease. In this review, we summarize the current literature describing the treatment of ischemic mitral regurgitation. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent publications have focused on describing outcomes following the treatment of ischemic mitral regurgitation based on the specific mechanism of regurgitation. New therapies such as remodeling rings and percutaneous approaches, along with insights into mitral valve replacement, have advanced the treatment of ischemic mitral regurgitation. SUMMARY: Mitral valve surgery and concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting represent the most effective strategy for the treatment of severe symptomatic ischemic mitral regurgitation. Overall, the survival of patients with ischemic mitral regurgitation is poor. Advances in mitral valve repair may improve long-term durability of surgery, whereas evolving percutaneous therapies may be a treatment option for patients with functional mitral regurgitation who are not surgical candidates.
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) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".