Feasibility of the PCI through 6F diagnostic catheters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The choice of guiding catheter for optimal back-up support is critical in order to achieve a successful PCI. Diagnostic 6 French (F) catheters have an internal lumen diameter as large as 5F guiding catheters. The aim of this study was to demonstrate for the first time the feasibility of performing PCI with Cordis 6F diagnostic catheters in selected coronary lesions. METHODS: 32 coronary stents were implanted using 6F diagnostic catheters in 27 eligible patients at the Montreal Heart Institute. The inclusion criteria were TIMI angiographic score < B2 in native coronary arteries or in coronary artery bypass grafts. Bifurcations and left main disease were not included. RESULTS: Eighty-five percent of the patients underwent PCI for acute coronary syndromes (ACS). PCI was performed in 5 lesions (19%) of the left coronary circulation; in 21 lesions (78%) of the right coronary artery and in one lesion (4%) of the 1st obtuse marginal branch of the circumflex artery, through a left mammary artery bypass. Only stents suitable for 5F guiding catheters were used. The largest stent was 4.0 mm in diameter and 32 mm in length. Direct stenting was performed in 75% of patients. The angiographic success for PCI of target lesions was 100%, without clinical or angiographic complications. CONCLUSIONS: In selected cases, diagnostic 6F catheters can be used for PCI with 5F compatible balloons and stents. PCI via a diagnostic catheter may provide even better back-up support and allows for significant resources and time savings, especially in patients with ACS.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".