Validation of the J-Chronic Total Occlusion Score for Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in an Independent Contemporary Cohort
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic total occlusion (CTO) recanalization is a complex and technically challenging procedure. The J-CTO score has been proposed to stratify case complexity and procedural success rates. However, the score has never been tested outside the setting of the original study. Moreover, its predictive value when using a hybrid antegrade or retrograde approach is unknown. We investigated the performance of the J-CTO score for predicting procedure complexity and success in an independent contemporary cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 209 consecutive patients who underwent CTO recanalization by a high-volume operator were included. Clinical and angiographic data were prospectively collected. The J-CTO score was applied for each patient, and discrimination and calibration were evaluated in the whole cohort, and according to the approach (antegrade 47% and retrograde 53%). Clinical and angiographic differences were noted between the original and studied cohort. The mean J-CTO score was 2.18±1.26, and successful guidewire crossing within 30 minutes and final angiographic success were 44.5% and 90.4%, respectively. The J-CTO score demonstrated good discrimination (c statistic, >0.70) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow P>0.1) in the whole cohort and for antegrade and retrograde approaches. However, the final success rate was not associated with the J-CTO score. CONCLUSIONS: In this independent cohort, the J-CTO score showed good discriminatory and calibration capacity for guidewire CTO crossing within 30 minutes but it does not for final success rate. The J-CTO score helps to predict complexity of CTO recanalization, and the simplicity of the score supports the widespread use as a clinical tool.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it