MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981370777 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz747.0569

P975Safety and clinical outcomes of rotational atherectomy: an eleven-year centre experience

2019· article· en· W2981370777 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ana Rita Pereira, Rita Calé, Pedro Santos, Ana Rita Almeida, A Marques, Sofia Alegria, A Briosa, D Sebaiti, Rui Vitorino, Ernesto Pereira, César Martins, Hélder Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConventional PCIMacePercutaneous coronary interventionMyocardial infarctionEjection fractionCardiologyInternal medicineRevascularizationCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyCoronary artery diseaseAnginaAtherectomyStroke (engine)AngioplastySurgeryStentHeart failureRestenosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Rotational atherectomy (RA) is an adjunctive tool for the management of heavily calcified coronary lesions during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but the clinical outcomes remain unclear. Access site choice is also poorly defined and there is growing evidence that transradial approach (TRA) is associated with lower complications and lower mortality. Objectives To assess the safety and long-term outcomes of RA for calcified coronary lesions and to investigate the influence of vascular access site in the efficacy and safety of the procedure. Methods Retrospective single-centre study that included consecutive PCI with RA performed from January 2006 to December 2017. Endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke and target vessel revascularization, at 1- and 5-year. Results 246 procedures were included in a total of 236 patients (pts): mean age 70.1±9.7 years, 73.6% male; 36.2% had previous PCI, 12.2% vascular peripheral disease (VPD), 24% reduced left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) and 6.9% were under hemodialysis. PCI with RA was mostly performed due to stable angina (48.9%) and via TRA (55.3%), with a total of 371 treated segments and a median number of 1 vessel treated per intervention. The left anterior descending artery was the most frequently treated artery (67.5%). Single burr was used in 76% of cases (mean number of burrs 1.23; mean burr size 1.5 mm). Procedural success rate was 94.7%. Complications were recorded in 9.3%, with no procedure related death. Clinical follow-up was complete in 98.8% of pts at 1-year and 81.3% at 5-year (mean time 62.3±41.8 months). Survival free of MACE at 1- and 5-year were 83.7% and 73.2%, respectively. Multivariate Cox regression identified 6 independent predictors (only 1 protector) for 1-year MACE (Fig. A) and 6 independent predictors (all of increased risk) for 5-year MACE (Fig. B). TRA was protector of 1-year MACE and Kaplan-Meier curves showed benefit for both 1- and 5-year MACE occurrence (Fig. C and D), without significant difference in procedural success (p=0.92) and complications (p=0.45) rate comparing to transfemoral approach. Conclusions RA followed by stenting was a safe procedure with a high immediate success rate but an increased number of long-term cardiovascular events. Some clinical conditions, such as previous PCI, VPD and reduced LVEF, seems to adversely influence the long-term outcome while TRA appears to be protective.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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