Carotid Artery Angioplasty and Stenting for Patients Less than 70 Years-of-Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent studies have suggested that carotid artery angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is a safe alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in average risk patients <70 years of age. We examined a consecutive series of patients who underwent CAS in order to determine the influence of patient age on outcome. METHODS: A retrospective, longitudinal cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent CAS at St. Michael's Hospital, Canada between January 2001 and November 2010 was performed. The outcome measures were 30-day stroke and 30-day composite death, stroke and acute myocardial infarction (MI). Patients were stratified based on age <70 and ≥ 70 years. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-nine patients underwent 165 CAS procedures. The 30-day risk of stroke was 3.8% while the composite outcome of death/stroke/MI was 8.2%. When stratified by age <70 and ≥ 70 years, the 30-day stroke rate was 0% versus 7.4% (p=0.03), and the composite outcome of death/stroke/MI was 2.6% versus 13.6% (p=0.02), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients <70 years of age undergoing CAS have a low rate of major complications, comparing favourably with historical CEA adverse event rates, and supporting the recent carotid stenosis literature that in the younger population CAS has a similar complication rate compared to CEA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".