Intra-Atrial Right Coronary Artery and Anomalous Origin of Left Circumflex Artery Found Concurrently
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coronary artery anomalies (CAAs) are known to be anatomical aberrations in the origin and structure. Due to the diverse anatomical variants, surgeons and angiographers have struggled when faced with patients who have CAA. To frame the complicated issues surrounding CAA, we present a case of a young patient found to have two CAAs, concurrently on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), while in the emergency room being evaluated for chest pain. Patient was medically observed without any invasive procedure since he was deemed to have low cardiovascular risk. Subsequently, literature on prevalence, as well as high risk findings are reviewed. Further studies to evaluate pharmacological, angiographic, and surgical interventions may have additional benefit for both patients and practitioners. Our aim is to help shed the light on difficulties cardiologists are facing during angiography. Additionally, our paper offers some guidance for how to evaluate and follow patients with similar findings into the future.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.009 | 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".