Impact of repeat revascularization within 5 years on 10-year mortality after percutaneous or surgical revascularization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The SYNTAX trial demonstrated negative impact of repeat revascularization (RR) on 5-year outcomes following PCI/CABG in patients with three-vessel(3VD) and/or left main coronary artery disease(LMCAD). We aimed to investigate the impact of RR within 5 years, on 10-year mortality in patients with 3VD and/or LMCAD after PCI/CABG. METHODS: The SYNTAXES study evaluated the vital status out to 10 years of patients with 3VD and/or LMCAD. Patients were stratified by RR within 5 years and randomized treatment. The association between RR within 5 years and 10-year mortality was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 330 out of 1800 patients (18.3%) underwent RR within 5 years. RR occurred more frequently after initial PCI than after initial CABG (25.9% vs. 13.7%, p < 0.001). Overall, 10-year mortality was comparable between patients undergoing RR and those not (28.2% vs. 26.1%, adjusted HR: 1.17, 95%CI 0.93-1.48, p = 0.187). In the PCI arm, RR was associated with a trend toward higher 10-year mortality (adjusted HR: 1.29, 95%CI 0.97-1.72, p = 0.075), while in the CABG arm, the trend was opposite (adjusted HR: 0.74, 95%CI 0.46-1.20, p = 0.219). Among patients requiring RR, those who underwent PCI as initial revascularization had a higher risk of 10-year mortality compared to initial CABG (33.5% vs. 17.6%, adjusted HR: 2.09, 95%CI 1.21-3.61, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: In the SYNTAXES study, RR within 5 years had no impact on 10-year all-cause death in the population overall. Among patients requiring any repeat procedures, 10-year mortality was higher after initial treatment with PCI than after CABG. These exploratory findings should be investigated with larger populations in future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ; SYNTAXES Unique identifier: NCT03417050. URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ; SYNTAX Unique identifier: NCT00114972.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".