[Clinical results of transmyocardial laser revascularization for 77 patients with coronary artery disease].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyses the clinical results of transmyocardial laser revascularization (TMLR) for 77 patients with coronary artery diseases (CAD). METHODS: The mean age of the patients was (65 +/- 7) years. Previous medical record included CABG (6 patients), PTCA (9), AMI (66.2%), hypertension (70.1%), and diabetes mellitus (45.5%). TMLR was performed on the beating heart via a left anterolateral thoracotomy at the fifth intercostal space. Transesophageal echocardiography showed transmyocardial penetration of 23 +/- 6 channels. RESULTS: The hospital mortality was 3.8%, and postoperative complications were AMI (3.8%), left ventricular failure (2.6%), PVC (5.2%). After operation, the mean CCS angina class was improved from the baseline 3.5 +/- 0.7 to 2.1 +/- 0.3 at 3 months, 1.7 +/- 0.3 at 6 months, 1.7 +/- 0.3 at 12 months and 1.8 +/- 0.4 at 24 months. One patient died of AMI and two died not due to cardiac events during a follow-up of 3 to approximately 24 months. Echocardiography showed that the average of left ventricular ejection fractions was improved significantly at 6 months after operation compared with the preoperative value (P = 0.0457). (201)TI-SPECT showed a remarkable improvement in reversible ischemia in 70% patients followed up. Metabolic stress test for 20 patients followed up patients demonstrated an average increase in exercise tolerance from 7.1 +/- 3.2 min at the baseline to 9.6 +/- 1.3 min at 12 months (P = 0.021). Similarly the METs increased from 4.3 +/- 2.1 at the baseline to 5.4 +/- 2.0 at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: TMLR is a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of end stage coronary artery diseases not amenable to PTCA or CABG. The effect of TMLR is associated with indication, correct evaluation of myocardial ischemia, and management for postoperative complications.
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 | 0.001 |
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".