Abstract 163: Regressed Coronary Aneurysm after Kawasaki Disease: What are they hiding? An Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Coronary artery aneurysms (CAA) are a serious complication of Kawasaki disease (KD). Regression of CAA occurs in 50% of the cases on follow up. Actual imaging techniques often described these segments as normal, whereas studies have shown significant endothelial and smooth muscle dysfunction. Method: KD patients scheduled for angiographic follow-up between June 2013 and August 2014 underwent OCT imaging. We compared coronary intimal changes in coronary artery segments with no history of CAA to segments with regressed CAA, and segments with persistent CAA. The intima was measured in sections adjacent to the CAA for the segments with persistent CAA, at the former CAA and adjacent sections for those who regressed, and at various corresponding sections for segments with no history of CAA. Results: OCT was performed on 18 patients at 12.4 ± 5.5 years. Overall 14/18 (77.7%) had a history of CAA. Of those, 7/14 (50.0%) had regressed CAA at time of OCT. Data was analyzed according to echocardiographic and angiographic progress of CAA segments. Accordingly, all 18/18 persistent CAA segments and 11/11 regressed CAA segments had significant intimal hyperplasia, compared to 1/13 with no history of segmental CAA (P<0.001). The intensity of intimal hyperplasia is displayed in Table 1. Conclusion: Despite normal angiographic features, regressed CAA segments displayed significant intimal hyperplasia, similarly to those with persistent CAA. These features may present a risk of adverse coronary events.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".