Conduits’ Biology Regulates the Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) is the gold standard for coronary surgical revascularization. Retrospective, prospective, and meta-analysis studies looking into long-term outcomes of using different conduits have pointed to the superiority of arterial grafts over veins and have placed the internal mammary artery as the standard conduit of choice for CABG. The superiority of the internal mammary artery over other conduits could be attributable to its intrinsic characteristics; however, little is known regarding the features that render some conduits atherosclerosis-prone and others atherosclerosis-resistant. Here, an overview is provided of the available data on the most commonly used conduits in CABG (internal mammary artery, saphenous vein, radial artery, gastroepiploic artery), highlighting the differences in their cellular biology, mechanical, biochemical, and vasoconstrictive properties. This information should help in furthering our understanding of the clinical outcomes observed for each of these conduits.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it