Chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention in Latin America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To report clinical, angiographic characteristics, outcomes, and predictors of unsuccessful procedures in patients who underwent chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in Latin America. BACKGROUND: CTO PCI has been increasingly performed worldwide, but there is a lack of information in this region. METHODS: An international multicenter registry was developed to collect data on CTO PCI performed in centers in Latin America. Patient, angiographic, procedural and outcome data were evaluated. Predictors of unsuccessful procedures were assessed by multivariable analysis. RESULTS: We have included data related to 1,040 CTO PCIs performed in seven countries in Latin America (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, and Puerto Rico). The mean age was 64 ± 10 years, and CTO PCI was performed mainly for angina control (81%) or treatment of a large ischemic area (30%). Overall technical success rate was 82.5%, and it was achieved with antegrade wire escalation in 81%, antegrade dissection/re-entry in 8% and with retrograde techniques in 11% of the successful procedures. Multivariable analysis identified moderate/severe calcification, a blunt proximal cap and a previous attempt as independent predictors of unsuccessful procedures. In-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) occurred in 3.1% of the cases, death in 1% and cardiac tamponade in 0.9% CONCLUSIONS: CTO PCI in Latin America has been performed mainly for ischemia relief. Procedures were associated with a success rate above 80% and low incidence of MACE. Predictors of unsuccessful procedures were similar to those previously reported in the literature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".