Prevalence of dual left anterior descending artery variations in CT angiography
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the frequency and features of dual left anterior descending artery (LAD) variants using computed tomography (CT) angiography. METHODS: A total of 1337 consecutive coronary CT angiography examinations performed between April 2010 and December 2013 were retrospectively evaluated for the presence of dual LAD. CT examinations were performed with either 64- or 320-row multidetector CT scanners. All CT angiography images were evaluated for the presence and morphologic features of dual LAD subtypes. RESULTS: Fifty-six dual LAD variations (4%) were identified in this study population. Type 1 was the most common type of dual LAD (n=48), while Type 3 (n=3) and Type 4 (n=2) were infrequent and Type 2 was not detected. Additionally, we detected previously unclassified dual LAD variations in three cases. CONCLUSION: Dual LAD may be a relatively more common variant than described in the medical literature, which is mostly based on catheter angiography studies. Coronary CT angiography seems markedly efficacious for detecting and documenting the anatomical details of dual LAD subtypes, as well as showing other associated cardiocoronary anomalies.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it