Everolimus‐eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation to treat saphenous vein graft disease, single‐center initial experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Recent studies have shown favorable outcomes with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Data on the use of BVS in saphenous vein graft disease (SVG) is currently lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 10 consecutive patients (13 lesions, including 6 in-stent restenosis) who underwent BVS for SVG disease between May 2013 and June 2015 at a tertiary care institution were included. Median follow-up period was 874 (720-926) days. One patient had scaffold thrombosis (ScT) 15 months after implantation, which was treated medically. Another patient had target lesion revascularization (TLR) in two different lesions, where BVS was used to treat in-stent restenosis. The composite endpoint of TLR, ScT, target vessel myocardial infarction, and cardiac death, was reached in two patients CONCLUSIONS: This first real-world data on the use of the ABSORB™ BVS in patients with SVG disease shows that its implantation is technically feasible. The observed rate of target lesion revascularization was similar to those observed with drug-eluting stents in similar settings. Larger studies are required to better define the optimal use of BVS to treat SVG disease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".