Procedural Safety and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Patients Receiving Ultra-Long Everolimus-Eluting Stent: A Single-Center Real-World Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Diffuse long coronary lesions are difficult to treat percutaneously. The aim of the present study was to assess the procedural safety and long-term efficacy of the ultra-long (48-mm) drug-eluting stent Xience Xpedition. Methods: This was an investigator-initiated, observational, all-comers study. A total of 92 patients with 93 lesions were enrolled in the study from October 2016 to October 2020. The primary outcome of the study was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). Secondary outcomes were individual components of the primary outcome and procedural success. Results: The mean (standard deviation (SD)) age of the participants was 58.8 (10.8) years. More than half of the patients had ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) at presentation (55.4%). Ten patients were in cardiogenic shock (CGS; 10.8%). Most of the lesions were located in the left anterior descending artery (48.3%). American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) type C was the most common lesion type amongst the intervened vessels (46.74%), with a mean syntax score (SD) of 16.99 (8.89). The mean stent diameter used was 2.77 mm (0.25). MACE was observed in 7.6% of patients studied at a median follow-up of 24 months. MACE was significantly lower in the population without CGS, occurring in only 2.4% of the patients; a significant difference in MACE was observed in patients with and without CGS (P < 0.001). Procedural success was obtained in 89.2% of total population; however, 96.3% of patients without CGS had procedural success. Conclusions: The deployment of the ultra-long 48-mm Xience Xpedition stent is feasible, safe, and effective; and it was associated with a good intermediate-term clinical outcome.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".