Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Angioplasty of Occluded Twin Circumflex Coronary Artery in a Patient of Acute Inferior Wall Myocardial Infarction: A Rare Anomaly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anomalies of the coronary arteries are reported in 1-2% of patients among diagnostic angiogram. Dual origin of a circumflex from both sinuses is extremely rare among them. We report a case of a patient who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute inferior wall myocardial infarction where left coronary injection demonstrated normal obtuse marginal and right coronary injection demonstrated normal right coronary artery (RCA). On further probing, an anomalous left circumflex (LCx) artery was seen arising from RCA ostium which was subsequently cannulated and revascularized by deployment of 2.75 × 26 mm Xience Prime drug-eluting stent (Abott Vascular, USA). Herein, we report for the first time primary percutaneous coronary intervention of twin circumflex and also illustrate that anomalous circumflex can be missed if it arises from RCA ostium and if not probed carefully.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".