Can internal thoracic arteries be used for both coronary artery bypass and breast reconstruction?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Recently, the internal thoracic arteries have been preferentially used in autologous breast reconstruction at the levels of the third or fourth intercostal spaces. This may compromise future treatment of occult coronary disease. We hypothesized that internal thoracic artery length at the fourth intercostal space would allow both breast reconstruction and future coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: Anatomic analysis of 20 female patients undergoing CABG was performed examining internal thoracic artery length from its origin to the third, fourth, fifth intercostal spaces and the left anterior descending (LAD) artery target. RESULTS: The left internal thoracic artery was anastamosed to the LAD target at a mean length of 11.4 ± 1.4 cm. The mean lengths of the pedicled left internal thoracic artery from its origin to the third, fourth and fifth intercostal space were 8.5 ± 1.0, 10.9 ± 1.2 and 13.0 ± 1.4 cm, respectively. Therefore, the left internal thoracic artery length was adequate at the fourth intercostal space in 6 of 20 (30%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Dissection of the left internal thoracic artery to the fourth intercostal space would allow for concomitant use in CABG and breast reconstruction in one-third of cases. However, skeletonization of the internal thoracic artery at the level of the fourth intercostal space would be sufficient for CABG in all cases following autologous breast reconstruction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".