Integrated minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting and angioplasty for coronary artery revascularization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) through the anterolateral minithoracotomy has become a promising therapeutic option in patients with lesion in left anterior descending artery (LAD), especially in multimorbid, elderly and reoperated patients with type C or B lesions. To expand the benefits of MIDCAB concept to patients with multivessel disease, a hybrid myocardial revascularization procedure (HMR) combining surgery of the LAD with interventional procedures for additional coronary lesions has recently been introduced. METHODS: Between January 1999 and September 2001, 50 patients (37 male, 13 female, mean age 54.8+/-20.1 years) underwent an HMR procedure. MIDCAB with endoscopic left internal thoracic artery (LITA) harvesting, followed by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for additional coronary lesions and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA), was performed in 11 patients (22%) and stenting in 39 patients (78%). Angiographic assessment of graft patency was performed in all patients during the PCI procedure. The clinical follow-up period was 3-32 months. RESULTS: There were no early and late deaths. Baseline Canadian Cardiology Society (CCS) class was 2.8+/-0.7 versus 1.1+/-0.9 (P<0.001) 30 days after HMR procedure. There were no major acute in-hospital cardiac events. Angiographic studies showed patent LIMA-LAD graft in 50 patients (100%). We showed good quality of anastomosis in 49 patients (98%). There was a moderate graft stenosis in one patient (2%). At long term follow-up, the rate of major cardiac events was 12%. Five patients (10%) developed restenosis after PCI, and one patient (2%) developed significant stenosis in site of LITA-LAD anastomosis; redo PCI was performed successfully. CONCLUSIONS: The hybrid procedure is a safe and effective method for complete revascularization in selected patients with double-vessel coronary artery disease (patients with type B or C lesions in the proximal LAD). This method allows performance of complete revascularization with minimization of surgical trauma. So far, long-term results of HMR are limited by the results of PCI.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".