Evaluation of Percutaneous Laser Myocardial Revascularization in Chinese Patients with Refractory Angina Pectoris
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aims to evaluate the feasibility and effect of percutaneous laser myocardial revascularization (PMR) in patients with refractory class III-IV angina. Patients were selected by: (1) angina class ≥III; (2) unsuitable to CABG and PTCA; (3) LVEF ≥30%; (4) absence of myocardial infarction in 6 months; (5) maximum diastolic wall thickness of left ventricle (LV) ≥8 mm in echocardiography. Eclipse Holmium laser generator and catheter were used. Eighteen patients (17 male and 1 female) with age of 63.3±7.5 years and a history of angina for 9.6±7.0 years were studied. They were refractory to 5.8±0.7 antianginal drugs. The angina class was IV in 11 patients and III in 9 patients. Maximum diastolic LV wall thickness was 10.2±0.8 mm. LVEF was 41.2±6.2%. Eleven and 9 patients had triple vessel and double vessel diffuse disease, respectively. A mean of 19.7±6.3 endomyocardial channels were made. Procedure time was 78.2±12.5 minutes and radiation time 24.3±7.4 minutes. There were no complications. During the follow-up of 18.7±1.6 months, angina class decreased from 3.8±0.7 to 2.1±0.8 (P<0.05). Ischemia in SPECT was significantly improved. PMR using Eclipse Holmium laser generator and catheter is safe in Chinese patients. This results suggest that patients with refractory class III or IV angina could be controlled by conjunctive use of PMR and regular antiangina drugs.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".