MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2424617464 · doi:10.5603/kp.a2015.0199

Outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention in patients after previous coronary artery bypass surgery

2015· article· en· W2424617464 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Piotr Zając, P Zycinski, Haval D Qawoq, Łukasz Jankowski, Jan Z. Peruga, Tomasz Wcisło, Piotr Pagórek, Jarosław D. Kasprzak, Michał Plewka

Bibliographic record

VenueKardiologia Polska · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConventional PCIPercutaneous coronary interventionCardiologyInternal medicineAnginaArteryCoronary artery bypass surgeryCoronary artery diseaseSurgeryMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients after previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) often require repeat percutaneous revascularisation due to poor patency rates of saphenous vein grafts (SVG) and higher risk of re-CABG. Few data are available to evaluate different percutaneous revascularisation strategies in patients after previous CABG. AIM: To evaluate outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients after previous CABG, including the effect of treatment on the quality of life and symptoms, and secondly to assess the relation between angiographic factors and treatment outcomes METHODS: This was a prospective observational study which included 78 patients after previous CABG. Following coronary angiography, the patients were assigned to one of three groups: group A (n = 20), PCI of a SVG (PCI SVG); group B (n = 29), PCI of a native coronary artery (PCI NA); group C (n = 29), control group that received medical treatment (MT) only. Duration of follow-up was 12 months. RESULTS: Compared to MT patients, patients treated with PCI had significantly higher Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class (2.75 vs. 2.41, p = 0.03) and more frequently had coronary angiography performed due to unstable angina (57% vs. 31%, p = 0.04). Patients in the PCI SVG group had significantly older SVG conduits compared to the PCI NA group (13.4 years vs. 8.2 years, p = 0.005). At 12 months of follow-up, we found a significant improvement in the EQ-5D index of the quality of life, and a significant reduction in CCS class in the PCI SVG group (0.66 vs. 0.7, p = 0.0003, and 2.75 vs. 1.9, p < 0.001, respectively) and in the PCI NA group (0.65 vs. 0.72, p < 0.001, and 2.75 vs. 2.17, p < 0.001, respectively), but no improvement in the MT group. Treatment outcomes did not differ significantly between the three groups (combined endpoint rate 20% vs. 13% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.37). In multivariate analysis, SVG age > 11 years was identified as a significant predictor of poor outcomes in patients treated with PCI after previous CABG. CONCLUSIONS: PCI in patients after previous CABG does not improve prognosis but significantly improves the quality of life and reduces symptom severity.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.822

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKardiologia PolskaSame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207