MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387642839 · doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2023.10.004

Coronary Intra-neointimal Hyperplasia Hematoma After High-Pressure Dilation

2023· article· en· W4387642839 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xin Huang, Gary S. Mintz, Ning Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Cardiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersXi’an Jiaotong University
KeywordsMedicineIntravascular ultrasoundRestenosisNeointimal hyperplasiaStentLumen (anatomy)HematomaCardiologyBalloonRadiologyArteryInternal medicineAngiographyStenosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 68-year-old man was admitted for unstable angina pectoris. Six months previously, he was treated with two zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZESs) (2.75×24.0mm and 3.50×18.0mm) implanted from the proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) to the left main artery (LM), and one ZES (2.50×18.0mm) in the proximal left circumflex coronary artery (LCX) (T-stenting strategy). Repeat coronary angiography showed in-stent restenosis (ISR) in the ostial LCX (Figure 1A) which was treated using a 2.50×26.0mm drug-coated balloon, and then kissing balloon inflations with a 3.50×15.0mm non-compliant balloon in the LAD and a 2.50×12.0mm non-compliant balloon in LCX, both at 6atm. After final proximal optimization technique with a 3.50×15.0mm non-compliant balloon at 12atm, angiography showed that the LM appeared to have a new, moderate stenosis (Figures 1B and 1C, Online Videos 1 and 2). Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) showed an intra-neointimal hyperplasia hematoma, which is a homogeneous in-stent structure with blood speckle in the false lumen and intima pushed inward to cause lumen compromise (Figure 1D, Online Videos 3 and 4). An additional everolimus-eluting stent (3.5×18.0mm) implantation successfully, compressing the hematoma (Figures 1E and 1F). The patient was free of clinical events for 4-years follow-up.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Cardiology→Same topicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→