MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

P2353Advantage and accuracy of a new jailed pressure wire technique using an optical fiber for coronary bifurcation lesions after post dilatation of stent by high pressure

2017· article· en· W2794678564 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yoshiaki Kawase, Toru Tanigaki, Hitoshi Matsuo

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStentOptical fiberHigh pressureCardiologyBifurcationBiomedical engineeringInternal medicineOpticsNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: To decide whether to treat jailed side branch (SB) lesions after main vessel stenting in coronary bifurcation lesions is occasionally difficult. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) in the jailed SB after stenting is important to decide additional treatment. However, re-crossing a pressure wire into a jailed SB was sometimes technically difficult and accuracy of the value of FFR was problem. Purpose: A new jailed pressure wire technique using a new optical fiber may be efficacy, accurate and safety. The purpose of this study is to prove advantage and accuracy of this jailed pressure wire technique after post dilatation of stent at high pressure Methods: We conducted a new jailed pressure wire technique using an optical fiber (OptoWire® [Opsens, Quebec]). A pressure wire was advanced in a SB and a conventional wire in the main vessel (MV). Drug eluting stent was deployed in the MV and an additional dilatation was performed in the MV with non-compliant balloon at high pressure while the pressure wire was jailed under the implanted stent. Post value of FFR in the SB was measured under the jailed pressure wire. If the FFR was >0.75 in the SB, no further SB intervention was necessary. The jailed pressure wire was pulled back carefully to the distal tip of the guiding catheter to assess drift. If the FFR was ≤0.75 in the SB, a kissing balloon technique (KBT) is performed.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→