MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017112414 · doi:10.1002/ccd.28937

In‐stent chronic total occlusion angioplasty in the <scp>LATAM‐CTO</scp> registry

2020· article· en· W3017112414 on OpenAlexaff
Pablo Lamelas, Lucio Padilla, Marcelo Abud, Ignacio Cigalini, Ignacio Vaca, Santiago Ordóñez, Ricardo Santiago, João Eduardo Tinoco de Paula, Luiz F. Ybarra, Antonio Carlos Botelho da Silva, Carlos M. Campos, Pedro Piccaro de Oliveira, Karlyse Claudino Belli, Alexandre Schaan de Quadros

Bibliographic record

VenueCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences CentreMcMaster UniversityImpact
FundersBoston Scientific Corporation
KeywordsMedicineAngioplastyStentPrimary angioplastyOcclusionCardiologyInternal medicinePercutaneous coronary interventionMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To inform about contemporary PCI practice of in-stent (IS) chronic total occlusions (CTO) from a large international registry in Latin America. BACKGROUND: IS-CTO represent a distinctive challenge for PCI, but literature is limited and restricted to high-resource regions of the world. METHODS: Patients undergoing CTO PCI enrolled in the LATAM CTO registry from 42 centers in eight countries were included. We analyzed demographics, angiographic, procedure technique, success and postprocedural outcomes between IS-CTO and non-IS-CTO PCI. RESULTS: From 1,565 patients IS-CTO was present in 181 patients (11.5%). IS-CTO patients had higher prevalence of diabetes and hypertension than patients without IS-CTO. IS-CTOs had less calcification (32.5 vs. 46.7%, p < .001), lower prevalence of a proximal branch (36.3 vs. 50.1%, p < .001), more likely to be ostial (24.4 vs. 18.1%, p = .042), were longer (28.5 vs. 25.2 mm, p = .062), and had less interventional collaterals (49.1 vs. 57.3%, p = .038) compared with non-IS-CTO. CTO complexity scores were similar between both groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the initial or successful strategy between IS-CTO and non-IS-CTO PCI. Technical success rates remained high in IS-CTO (86.7%) and non-IS-CTO (83.1%, p = .230). There was no independent association between IS-CTO and technical success in multivariable analysis. There were no differences between IS-CTO and non-IS-CTO groups for in-hospital clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: In a contemporary, multicenter, and international registry from Latin America, IS-CTO PCI is frequent and has comparable technical success and safety profile compared to non-IS-CTO PCI.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatheterization and Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207