MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281565091 · doi:10.1093/ehjcr/ytac210

Double Reducer implantation in the coronary venous system for treatment of refractory angina: a case report

2022· article· en· W4281565091 on OpenAlex
Andréa Picchi, Leonardo Misuraca, Paolo Calabria, Ugo Limbruno

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Case Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronary sinusAnginaCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyPercutaneousRevascularizationRefractory (planetary science)Coronary VeinCardiologyReducerVeinInternal medicineConventional PCISurgeryMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The coronary sinus (CS) Reducer can be considered for the treatment of refractory angina in patients unsuitable for coronary revascularization, but its effect can be influenced by the significant heterogeneity in the anatomy of the cardiac venous system. Case summary: We report the case of a 70-year-old woman with recurrent episodes of rest angina refractory to optimal medical therapy [Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Class IV] and inducible ischaemia in a large myocardial territory. Given the diffuse and peripheral nature of the coronary disease, the patient was considered ineligible for percutaneous or surgical revascularization and she was regarded as a good candidate for a CS occluder. Since coronary venous angiography showed the middle cardiac vein (MCV) to be at least as relevant as the CS, successful implantation of two devices, one in the CS and the second in the MCV, was performed. At 6-month follow-up, the patient reported a significant improvement in angina, resulting in a reduction of the CCS class from Grades IV to III. Discussion: In patients affected by refractory angina and regarded as good candidates for Reducer implantation, a thorough comprehension of the cardiac venous pathway drainage is of pivotal importance to guarantee the therapeutic success of the procedure. In this patient, since the CS and the MCV seemed to contribute equally to coronary venous drainage, Reducer implantation in both vessels allowed to obtain a significant improvement of symptoms. The clinical effectiveness of this strategy needs to be validated in randomized clinical trials.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it