Contradictory Effect of Coronary Collateral Circulation on Regional Myocardial Perfusion That Assessed by Quantitative Myocardial Perfusion Scintigraphy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies showed conflicting results about the contribution of coronary collateral circulation (CCC) to myocardial perfusion and function. The aim of this study was to investigate these contradictory problems by gated myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (gated MPS) for the first time. METHODS: The current cohort was retrospectively selected among patients who underwent gated MPS and coronary angiography within 2 months. Two different groups including 96 patients were assessed by gated MPS to detect the understanding of the miscellaneous effect of CCC on myocardial perfusion. Group 1 consisted of those who had collateral arteries that were not-well-developed (Rentrop grade 0 - 1) (n = 58), while group 2 consisted of those who had collateral arteries that were well-developed (Rentrop grade 2 - 3) (n = 38). RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between groups 1 and 2 in terms of perfusion and functional parameters obtained from gated MPS. Furthermore, no statistically significant difference was found in the phase analysis parameters which is a novel technique to evaluate left ventricular synchronization. On the other hand the left ventricular mass index values were high and quite close to the statistically significant value (P = 0.059) in group 2. CONCLUSIONS: The current results that obtained by using the gated MPS technique for the first time in the evaluation of CCC showed that the well-developed collateral circulation has a positive effect on myocardial perfusion and function, but this effect was not statistically significant. Results need to be supported by large scale of patients' size.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".