Off-pump coronary artery revascularization in octogenarians: is it better?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Octogenarians are the fastest growing stratum of the population and have the highest prevalence of coronary artery disease. In the past, physicians have been reluctant to provide these patients with optimal care. Seniors are frequently excluded from large randomized trials and generally not included in published guidelines. The purpose of this review is to revisit the demography and epidemiology of coronary artery disease in this population as well as therapeutic strategies used. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent publications have shown significant advancement in medical and invasive treatment of coronary artery disease in elderly, with special focus on the potential benefit of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery. SUMMARY: Although OPCAB surgery has gained popularity over the past 15 years, its benefit regarding operative mortality and major complications has not been clearly defined in the general population. There is a body of literature supporting its benefit in the elderly population. OPCAB surgery has the potential of decreasing operative mortality and major postoperative complications such as stroke, delirium, atrial fibrillation, and decline in neurocognitive functions in these patients. Off-pump surgery is technically more demanding and has been blamed for providing less complete revascularization and lower graft patency rate, especially in less experienced hands. However, with the upcoming demographic explosion of senior citizens in western societies, OPCAB surgery has definitely to be a part of the armamentarium of modern cardiac surgeons.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".