Can nominal burst pressure guarantee against dissection during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 68 year-old male with hypertension, dyslipidemia, and current smoking as coronary risk factors was referred for coronary angiography (CAG) in lieu of chronic stable angina. He was Canadian Cardiovascular Society class III despite guideline-directed medical treatment. The CAG revealed a critical stenotic lesion (90%) in the proximal left circumflex (LCx) coronary artery with mild calcification. A 3.5 × 23 mm Xience prime drug-eluting stent (Abbott Vascular, USA) was deployed at 8 atm. Duringthe procedure, he developed chest pain. Angiogram revealed a long spiral dissection starting from the distal edge of the stent. To bail out, another overlapping 3 × 38 mm Xience prime stentwas deployed at 10 atm pressure, showing proper stent expansion and no residual dissection flap with TIMI-3 coronary flow. This case highlights that dissection can occur in a calcified vessel even below the nominal pressure which could be successfully bailed out by implantation with another coronary stent with complete cover of the coronary dissection.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".