[Chronic effects of percutaneous transmyocardial laser revascularization in patients with refractory angina].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Conflicting results exist on the therapeutic effects of percutaneous myocardial laser revascularization (PMR) in patients with refractory angina pectoris. This study assessed the effects of PMR on myocardial innervation and perfusion in patients with refractory angina pectoris. METHODS: Patients with refractory angina unsuitable for standard revascularization treatment (PTI and CABG) were randomly divided into medication plus PMR (PMR, n = 17) and medication group (M, n = 13). Coronary sinus noradrenaline (NE) and epinephrine (E) levels, heart rate variability (HRV), total ischemic burden (TIB), and ischemic ST segmental events (STI), myocardial perfusion were evaluated at pre-, immediately post and 12 months post treatment (mean followed up time = 11.6 +/- 4.9 months). RESULTS: In PMR group, one patient developed non-persistent ventricular tachycardia, 2 developed pericardial tamponade and another one patient developed heart failure at 24 h after operation. Coronary sinus NE and E were significantly lower 60 min post PMR compared to pre-PMR and HRV was significantly increased 24 h post PMR. One year post treatments, angina grade was significantly decreased in PMR (1.7 +/- 0.3) than that in M group (0.4 +/- 0.2, P < 0.05) while other parameters were similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: PMR induced an early transient denervation and decreased angina grade one year post treatment in patients with refractory angina.
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) | 0.002 | 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".