Usefulness of oral anticoagulation in patients with coronary aneurysms: Insights from the CAAR registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the Usefulness of oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT) in patients with coronary artery aneurysm (CAA). BACKGROUND: Data on the most adequate antithrombotic CAA management is lacking. METHODS: Patients included in CAAR (Coronary Artery Aneurysm Registry, Clinical Trials.gov: NCT02563626) were selected. Patients were divided in OAT and non-OAT groups, according to anticoagulation status at discharge and 2:1 propensity score matching with replacement was performed. The primary endpoint of the analysis was a composite and mutual exclusive endpoint of myocardial infarction, unstable angina (UA), and aneurysm thrombosis (coronary ischemic endpoint). Net adverse clinical events, major adverse cardiovascular events, their single components, cardiovascular death, re-hospitalizations for heart failure, stroke, aneurysm thrombosis, and bleeding were the secondary ones. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred thirty-one patients were discharged without OAT and 211 with OAT. In the propensity-matched sample (390 patients in the non-OAT group, 195 patients in the OAT group), after 3 years of median follow-up (interquartile range 1-6 years), the rate of the primary endpoint (coronary ischemic endpoint) was significantly less in the OAT group as compared to non-OAT group (8.7 vs. 17.2%, respectively; p = .01), driven by a significant reduction in UA (4.6 vs. 10%, p < .01) and aneurysm thrombosis (0 vs. 3.1%, p = .03), along with a non-significant reduction in MI (4.1 vs. 7.7%, p = .13). A non-significant increase in bleedings, mainly BARC type 1 (55%), was found in the OAT-group (10.3% in the non-OAT vs. 6.2% in the OAT group, p = .08). CONCLUSION: OAT decreases the composite endpoint of UA, myocardial infarction, and aneurysm thrombosis in patients with CAA, despite a non-significant higher risk of bleeding.
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".