Surgical treatment of myocardial bridging: report of 31 cases.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Myocardial bridging (MB) is usually considered a benign condition but may result in myocardial ischemia, myocardial infarction (MI), exercise-induced tachycardia, atrioventricular conduction block or even sudden cardiac death. This retrospective study summarizes our operative methods and outcomes for treatment of 31 cases of MB. METHODS: From January 1997 to December 2006, 31 consecutive patients (24 men and 7 women; aged 35 - 67 years; mean 52.3 years) with MB underwent surgical treatment. Thirteen patients had MB only and 18 patients had MB associated with other heart diseases. In preoperative cardiac function grading, 5 patients were in NYHA class I and 18 in NYHA class II and 8 in NYHA class III. Among them, 15 underwent myotomy and 16 underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). RESULTS: All patients survived and recovered uneventfully. Neither hospital or late death nor major complications occurred. Postoperative exercise testing in all patients failed to reveal any persistent ischemia. Follow-up time was 3 - 115 months (mean 31 months). Follow-up angiographic studies in 21 patients (68%) demonstrated restoration of coronary blood flow and myocardial perfusion without significant residual compression of the artery. All patients were symptom-free and currently in NYHA class I - II. CONCLUSION: The patients who are refractory to medication should actively undergo the surgical procedures such as myotomy and CABG. Myotomy should be advocated as the first choice because of its safety and satisfactory results.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".