Coronary Intervention in Separate Origin of Left Anterior Descending and Left Circumflex Coronary Artery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coronary anomalies are not commonly encountered in routine clinical practice. This case report is of a 55-year-old female who presented with effort angina, Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class II, since last six months with shortness of breath. Echocardiography (ECG) revealed the presence of Non ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI) and the presence of no Regional Wall Motion Abnormality (RWMA), with normal left ventricular systolic function. Right transradial coronary angiogram revealed the presence of separate origin of Left Anterior Descending (LAD) and Left Circumflex (LCX) coronary artery. Although separate origin of LAD and LCX is the most common benign coronary anomaly noted in clinical practice, interestingly both coronary arteries in this case were harboring significant atherosclerotic occlusion and were successfully revascularised with Drug Eluting Stents (DES). Coronary intervention in separate origin of LAD and LCX requires special maneuvers during guide catheter management for percutaneous intervention. Clockwise rotation of the guide catheter to selectively engage the LCX and anticlockwise rotation of the guide catheter to selectively engage the LAD is the key for procedural success during coronary intervention. This case is unique and the first to describe the separate origin of LAD and LCX presenting as NSTEMI with critically obstructive Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) in both of them and age being the only conventional cardiac risk factor behind it.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".