MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344098212 · doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezw005

Clinical and angiographic outcomes associated with surgical revascularization of angiographically borderline 50–69% coronary artery stenoses

2016· article· en· W2344098212 on OpenAlexaff
Janek Senaratne, Colleen M. Norris, Michelle M. Graham, Diane Galbraith, Jayan Nagendran, Darren H. Freed, Jonathan Afilalo, Sean van Diepen

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General HospitalProvincial Laboratory of Public HealthOntario Stroke NetworkAlberta HealthCanadian VIGOUR CentreUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Alberta HospitalAlberta Hospital Edmonton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineHazard ratioEjection fractionArteryCoronary artery diseaseIncidence (geometry)RevascularizationDiabetes mellitusConfidence intervalCardiopulmonary bypassMyocardial infarctionHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) improves outcomes in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Bypass of angiographically significant lesions ≥70% is recommended, yet little is known about the incidence/outcomes with bypasses of 50-69% angiographically borderline lesions (ABLs) without fractional flow reserve testing. The objective of this study was to investigate the incidence and outcomes of bypass of 50-69% ABLs. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2013, 3195 patients underwent isolated first multivessel CABG. Patients with an isolated ABL of a major epicardial vessel were included. Outcomes of interest included time to all-cause mortality, and 30-day and 1-year mortality. RESULTS: Among 350 patients with an ABL, 268 (76.6%) had the vessel containing the ABL bypassed, while 82 (23.4%) did not. The mean follow-up was 4.2 years. Patients with a bypassed ABL were older (66.1 vs 62.5 mean years, P = 0.006) but otherwise similar in sex, comorbidities, diabetes, ejection fraction and number of coronary stenoses. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was longer in patients with bypassed ABLs (104.2 vs 90.4 min, mean, P < 0.001). Unadjusted overall mortality until the end of follow-up was higher among patients with bypassed ABLs (11.6 vs 3.7%, P = 0.034). After multivariable adjustment, the association between ABL bypass and mortality was attenuated (hazard ratio 2.84, 95% confidence interval: 0.87-9.23, P = 0.080). No differences were observed in unadjusted 30-day (1.1 vs 0.0%, P = 0.336) or 1-year mortality (4.1 vs 0.0%, P = 0.062). Repeat revascularization rate of patients with bypassed ABLs was numerically higher (4.1 vs 0.0%, P = 0.107). CONCLUSIONS: In an unselected cohort of patients with ABLs, bypass of borderline 50-69% lesions is frequently performed and not associated with improved long-term survival. Our findings suggest that the routine surgical revascularization of 50-69% ABLs may not be 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Cardio-Thoracic SurgerySame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207