Clinical and Angiographic Outcomes in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery with Multiple versus Single Distal Target Grafts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with multiple distal target (MDT) grafts requires less graft material and reduces cardiopulmonary bypass time; however, there may be a higher incidence of graft failure. A real-world analysis reporting long-term outcomes associated with MDT grafts is lacking. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 6262 consecutive patients who underwent an isolated first CABG from 2004-2012, patients with MDTs were propensity matched to those with single distal target (SDT) grafts. Logistic regression adjusted for traditional, anatomical, and functional definitions of complete revascularization (CR). Outcomes included 30-day, 1-year, and long-term mortality (median 6.29 years). Results: A total of 549 (8.8%) CABG patients had a MDT graft. CR defined using traditional (96.1% versus 92.0%, P = .005), anatomical (89.0% versus 80.20%, P < .001), and functional (90.7% versus 82.6, P < .001) definitions was more frequent in MDT patients. No significant differences in mortality were observed at 30 days (2% versus 3.3%, P = .18), 1-year (3.8% versus 4.9%, P = .37), or through end of follow-up (18.0% versus 16.6% P = .52) between the MDT and SDT groups, respectively. Similarly, no differences were observed after adjustment for all definitions of CR. Graft failure in MDT and SDT patients was 37.8% and 27.6%, respectively (P = .18). CONCLUSION: In a contemporary population-based cohort, no differences in mortality were observed between CABG patients with MDT and SDT grafts. Our findings support the safety of MDT grafts to facilitate CR in patients and when graft material is limited.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".