Features of re-endothelialization process during implantation of coronary stents (review of literature)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Method of endovascular treatment for coronary artery lesions has made its way from balloon angioplasty to implantation of drug-eluting stents. Today, drug-eluting stents are widely used for coronary artery revascularization and have significantly reduced the incidence of restenosis compared to bare metal stents. Delayed or incomplete re-endothelialization is a very specific problem for most drug-eluting stents, as after their implantation, there is a risk of developing late thrombosis associated not only with incomplete endothelialization of the stent struts or impaired endothelial function, but also with chronic inflammatory reaction of the vascular wall. The development of stents with ultrathin struts, the abluminal coating of the struts with polymer and drug contribute to the decrease of vascular wall trauma and of the inflammatory response and provide faster stent endothelialization. Keywords: coronary heart disease, coronary stents, re-endothelialization, microporous coating, polymer-free antiproliferative coating, Yukon stent
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".