Nonrandomized Comparison of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for the Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease in Octogenarians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of the present study was to compare the midterm follow-up results of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary bypass graft surgery (CABG) for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery disease in octogenarians. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 249 consecutive patients > or =80 years of age diagnosed with left main coronary artery disease underwent coronary revascularization in our center between January 2002 and January 2008; 145 patients underwent CABG, and 104 patients had PCI. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE [cardiac death, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular event, revascularization]) were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 23 +/- 16 months. Patients who underwent PCI were older; had higher creatinine levels, lower ejection fraction, and higher EuroSCORE; and presented more frequently with an acute coronary syndrome. Drug-eluting stents were used in 48% of PCI patients. A propensity score analysis was performed to adjust for baseline differences between the 2 groups. Survival free of cardiac death or myocardial infarction (PCI, 65.4%; CABG, 69.7%) and MACCE-free survival (PCI, 56.7%; CABG, 64.8%) at follow-up were similar between the groups (adjusted hazard ratio for survival free of cardiac death or myocardial infarction, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.64 to 2.56; P=0.47; adjusted hazard ratio for MACCE-free survival, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.59 to 2.0; P=0.73). The EuroSCORE value was an independent predictor of MACCE regardless of the type of revascularization (hazard ratio, 1.17 for each EuroSCORE increase of 1 point; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.25; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center, nonrandomized study, there were no significant differences in cardiac death or myocardial infarction and MACCE between CABG and PCI for the treatment of left main coronary artery disease in octogenarians after a mean follow-up of 2 years. Baseline EuroSCORE was the most important predictor of MACCE regardless of the type of revascularization. Randomized studies comparing both revascularization strategies in this high-risk coronary population are warranted.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".