MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 9150: Re-Elevation of Troponin Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Significantly Predicts 1-Year Mortality in Patients with High-risk Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes

2011· article· en· W2527562707 on OpenAlexaff
Pierluigi Tricoci, Sergio Leonardi, Jennifer A. White, Brian Tinga, Robert P. Giugliano, Harvey D. White, Paul W. Armstrong, Neal S. Kleiman, V. A. Sulimov, Jean‐François Tanguay, Basil S. Lewis, Stefan James, C. Michael Gibson, Eugene Braunwald, Frans Van de Werf, Robert M. Califf, Kenneth W. Mahaffey, LK Newby

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsGibson Energy (Canada)Montreal Heart InstituteCanadian VIGOUR Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneous coronary interventionCardiologyInternal medicineElevation (ballistics)Acute coronary syndromeST elevationTroponinTroponin IST segmentMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The prognostic value of cardiac troponin (cTn) elevation post PCI is controversial. Moreover, in high-risk NSTE ACS patients presenting with elevated necrosis markers, the ability to use cTn to detect post-PCI MI is especially challenging: primarily this relates to discriminating PCI-related elevation from natural evolution of presenting MI. We addressed this issue by reviewing each cTn trend during the index ACS admission in all patients undergoing PCI randomized in the EARLY ACS (n=5552) and SYNERGY (n=4647) trials. Methods: Time and cTn value (indexed by ULN) data pairs were plotted into graphics for each of 10,199 pts and independently reviewed by 2 physicians to detect post-PCI cTn (re)elevation (example in figure). Post-PCI cTn peak was identified for each plot, and the relationship between peak cTn post PCI and 1-year mortality was evaluated using Cox proportional hazard modeling, correcting for the 15 clinical variables of the EARLY ACS 1-year mortality model (including baseline cTn). Results: Patients were classified into 3 groups: (i) (re)elevation post PCI not evaluable because cTn values rising through the time of PCI (group 1; N=4427 [43%]; excluded from further analyses); (ii) cTn values stable/falling with post-PCI (re)elevation detected (group 2; N=4276 [42%]); (iii) cTn values stable/falling but without post-PCI (re)elevation (group 3; n=1496 [15%]). In the multivariable model including patients in groups 2 and 3, peak cTn post PCI was significantly associated with a 7% increase in hazard of death per each 10xULN increase (adj. HR 1.07; 95% CI 1.03-1.11; p=0.0008). Conclusion: We describe a methodology that allows clear differentiation of post-PCI cTn (re)elevation from presenting MI in over half of high-risk NSTE ACS patients undergoing PCI. This approach identified a highly significant relationship between post-PCI cTn and 1-year mortality and has relevance for the incorporation of cTn for definition of post-PCI MI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes→French-language works237,207→