Stenting supported percutaneous coronary angio plasty for the treatment of refractory unstable angina pectoris
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the short and long term effect of stenting supported percutaneous coronary angioplasty for the treatment of refractory unstable angina pectoris. Methods Thirty two patients with refractory unstable angina treated with stenting supported percutaneous coronary angioplasty were retrospectively analyzed. Results The success rate for patients and lesions were 96.9% and 94.5% , respectively. No serious complications (death, myocardial infarction, and emergency bypass surgery) occurred. Chest pain disappeared or significantly reduced in all 31 successfully treated patients. During (17.2±14.1) months follow up,1 failed patient (3.1%) died, 2 (6.3%) developed to myocardial infarction, 7 (21.9%) underwent target vessel revascularization (angioplasty, 6; bypass surgery, 1). Conclusion Refractory angina can be treated with stenting supported percutaneous coronary angioplasty with high success rate, excellent acute effect and satisfactory long term effect. [
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) | 0.001 | 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".