One‐year results of the <scp>ICON</scp> (ionic versus non‐ionic contrast to obviate worsening nephropathy after angioplasty in chronic renal failure patients) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Long-term clinical outcomes after exposure to non-ionic iso-osmolar contrast medium (IOCM) or ionic low-osmolar CM (LOCM) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing coronary angiography are unclear. METHODS: The ICON trial was a prospective, double-blinded, multicentre study that randomly assigned 146 patients with CKD undergoing coronary angiography with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to the non-ionic IOCM Iodixanol or the ionic LOCM Ioxaglate. We report the 1-year clinical outcomes. RESULTS: After randomization, baseline and procedural characteristics were well-matched between the two groups. At 1 year, three deaths (4.1%) occurred in the ioxaglate and nine deaths in the iodixanol group (13.6%, P = 0.07). The cardiac death rate at 1 year was 2.7% in the ioxaglate group and 9.1% in the iodixanol group (P = 0.07). There were no significant differences in the rates of myocardial infarction (1.4% vs. 1.5%; P = 1.00) and repeated revascularization (6.8% vs. 9.1%; P = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: The use of ionic LOCM ioxaglate was associated with a numerically lower mortality at 1 year as compared to iodixanol in patients who underwent cardiac catheterization. Future studies evaluating long-term safety following exposure to different types of CM are 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".