Infarct size and left ventricular function in the PRoximal Embolic Protection in Acute myocardial infarction and Resolution of ST-segment Elevation (PREPARE) trial: ancillary cardiovascular magnetic resonance study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate whether primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with combined proximal embolic protection and thrombus aspiration results in smaller final infarct size and improved left ventricular function assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients compared with primary PCI alone. Background Primary PCI with the Proxis system improves immediate microvascular flow post-procedure as measured by ST-segment resolution, which could result in better outcomes. METHODS: The ancillary CMR study included 206 STEMI patients who were enrolled in the PRoximal Embolic Protection in Acute myocardial infarction and Resolution of ST-Elevation (PREPARE) trial. CMR imaging was assessed between 4 and 6 months after the index procedure. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in final infarct size (6.1 g/m(2) vs 6.3 g/m(2), p = 0.78) and left ventricular ejection fraction (50% vs 50%, p = 0.46) between both groups. Also, systolic wall thickening in the infarct area (44% vs 45%, p = 0.93) or the extent of transmural segments (8.3% of segments vs 8.3% of segments, p = 0.60) showed no significant differences. The incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebral events at 6 months was similar in the Proxis and control group (8% vs 10%, respectively, p = 0.43). Conclusions Primary PCI with combined proximal embolic protection and thrombus aspiration in STEMI patients did not result in significant differences in final infarct size or left ventricular function at follow-up CMR. In addition, there was no difference in the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebral events at 6 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: number ISRCTN71104460.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".