Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in an Octogenarian With Anomalous Origin Arising From Right Sinus: A Rare Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anomalous coronary artery origins are not common in routine clinical practice. The incidence of coronary anomalies in patients undergoing coronary angiography is less than 1%. The greatest challenges faced in the management are delays in identification and difficulty engaging the anomalous coronary artery. Operator experience in promptly identifying the anomaly and selection of the appropriate catheter is critical for successful intervention. We are presenting a case of acute inferior and posterior wall myocardial infarction (MI) with an anomalous origin of the left circumflex artery from the right coronary sinus. Learning objective is that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in an anomalous left circumflex can be technically difficult because selective cannulation of the vessel may not be easy. An anomalous left circumflex artery has a rare presentation of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Complicated STEMI with cardiogenic shock is not commonly seen in anomalous coronary artery origin from the right sinus. Percutaneous intervention in patients with STEMI with an anomalous left circumflex artery has a high risk and is technically challenging.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".