MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886834748 · doi:10.14740/cr749w

Congenital Absence of the Left Circumflex Artery With Super-Dominant Right Coronary Artery: Extremely Rare Coronary Anomaly

2018· article· en· W2886834748 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shakil Shaikh, Vikrant Deshmukh, Vishal Patil, Zahidullah Khan, Rahul Singla, Narender Omprakash Bansal

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Artery Anomalies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCircumflexCardiologyInternal medicineRight coronary arteryArteryChest painCoronary arteriesAnginaLeft coronary arteryAcute coronary syndromeCoronary angiogramRadiologyCoronary angiographyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among the congenital anomalies of the coronary arteries, absent left circumflex artery (LCX) defect is extremely rare. Only a few cases have been reported in the literature. We report a case of a 48-year-old female who presented with a 4-month history of exertional chest pain with positive stress (treadmill) test. Conventional coronary angiogram showed a normal left anterior descending, absent LCX and a super-dominant right coronary artery (RCA) with prominent branches. Aortography also failed to show a separate ostium for the left circumflex artery. Multi-detector computed tomographic coronary angiography was performed to confirm the diagnosis of congenital absence of the LCX. It is a benign incidental finding, however some patients present with angina-like symptoms often resulting in detection of this rare anatomy on coronary angiography. Precise morphological and functional evaluation of the anomalous coronary artery is important for selecting the best treatment modality and better prognosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology ResearchSame topicCoronary Artery AnomaliesFrench-language works237,207