Angiographic and clinical outcomes of drug‐eluting versus bare metal stent deployment in the Occluded Artery Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The majority of patients randomized to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the Occluded Artery Trial (OAT) and its angiographic substudy, the Total Occlusion Study of Canada 2 (TOSCA-2) were treated with bare metal stents (BMS). We aimed to determine if stenting of the target occlusion in OAT with drug-eluting stents (DES) was associated with more favorable angiographic results and clinical outcome when compared with treatment with BMS. METHODS: TOSCA-2 DES was a prospective nonrandomized substudy that provided 1-year angiographic comparison of late loss and reocclusion in 25 patients treated with DES and in 128 treated with BMS. In addition, all PCI-assigned patients enrolled from the time when DES were first utilized were similarly categorized (DES n = 77, and BMS n = 386) and compared using the 3-year cumulative OAT primary combined endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, or Class-IV heart failure, as well as angina. RESULTS: In-segment late loss was 0.14 +/- 0.45 mm for DES and 0.75 +/- 0.86 mm for BMS (P < 0.001). Corresponding binary restenosis rates were 13.0% and 44.3% (P = 0.005). Occlusion at 1 year was observed in 4.0 and 12.1%, respectively (P = 0.23). The 3-year cumulative primary event rate was 13.8% with DES and 12.5% with BMS (hazard ratio 1.08, 99% confidence intervals 0.44, 2.64; P = 0.83). Angina over time occurred less frequently in the DES group (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Although the reduction of late loss and trend to reduction in reocclusion with the use of DES for PCI of persistently occluded IRA 3-28 days post myocardial infarction did not translate into a signal for reduction in death, reinfarction, or Class IV heart failure, DES use was associated with less angina over time. Further follow-up is warranted.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".