Cl incal Efficacy of Percutaneous Laser Myocardial Revascularization on Treatment of Angina Pectoris
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To observe the clinical efficacy of percutaneous laser myocardial revascularization (PLMR) on the treatment of angina pectoris. Methods Twenty-seven patients with refractory angina pectoris were treated by percutaneous myocardial revascularization with holmium: YAG laser. The angina pectoris class of Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) and time to 1-mm ST segment depression induced by Naughton exercise test were used as the clinical observational indexes of PLMR treatment. Results The number of channels created by PLMR were from 5 to 15 with an average of 8±4. The mean CCS angina class before PLMR was 3.5±0.5 and fell to 2.2±0.8 at 1-month, to 2.0±0.6 at 3-month and to 2.1±0.5 at 6-month after PLMR, respectively. Time to 1 mm ST segment depression was (360±160) s before PLMR, (406±260) s at 1-month and (420±290) s at 3-month and (450±312) s at 6-month after PLMR, respectively. Conclusion The present clinical observation demonstrates that PLMR can effectively reduce the severity of angina pectoris and can be used as an efficient alternative therapeutic method for patients with refractory angina pectoris untreatable by PTCA and CABG.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".