Long-term Results of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in the Treatment of Ischemic Cardiac Diseases with Heart Insufficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the long-term results of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in treating cardiac diseases with heart insufficiency by analyzing the long-term survival rate and heart failure exemption rate of the patients.Methods A total of 239 patients who had coronary heart disease with left heart dysfunction (LVEF40%) were enrolled in our study.Among the patients,there were 215 males and 24 females aged from 32 to 78 years old with an average age of 59.1.Before operation,193 patients had a past history of myocardial infarction and 31 had angina.According to the New York heart function assessment (NYHA),26 patients were categorized as class Ⅰ,106 as class Ⅱ,73 as class Ⅲ and 34 as class Ⅳ.Coronary angiography showed 10 cases (4.2%) of single vessel disease,35 cases (14.6%) of double vessel disease and 194 cases (81.2%) of triple vessel disease.The result of preoperative ultrasound cardiogram showed that LVEF was 35.7%±4.6%.All patients received CABG,including 153 (64.0%) on-pump surgeries and 86 (35.9%) off-pump surgeries.Selective operation was done on 237 patients and there were 2 emergency cases.Valve repair or replacement,ventricular aneurysmectomy or aneurysm plication were not carried out during the operation.Results There were 1 to 6 (3.4±1.1) bypass grafting vessels in each case.Five (2.09%) patients died during the hospital stay,among which 2 died of low cardiac output and circulation failure,1 died of malignant arrhythmia,1 died of renal failure,and 1 died of coma with multi-organ failure.The follow-up period was 5.12±1.79 years.During the follow-up,18 patients (7.7%) were lost and 29 patients died.Among them,there were 24 cardiac deaths and the cardiac death rate at the first year and the fifth year was 2.8% and 9.4% respectively.There were 40 cases of heart failure during the follow-up period.The exemption rate of heart failure was 93.7% and 81.8% at the first year and the fifth year respectively.The survival rate was 97.2% at the first year and 89.3% at the fifth year.Conclusion The long-term result of CABG in treating patients with ischemic heart insufficiency is satisfying.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".