Abstract 4132838: Coronary Collaterals Provide Cardioprotection in Hemorrhagic ST-elevation MI (STEMI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Development of intramyocardial hemorrhage (IMH) in acute STEMI following reperfusion is estimated to affect 35-50% of patients. IMH is a lethal event as it contributes to larger MI size, compromised myocardial salvage, adverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling, lower LVEF, and consequential major adverse CV events post-MI. Whether coronary collateral circulation reduces the deleterious effects of IMH has not been investigated. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that coronary collaterals could reduce the extent of post-reperfusion IMH volume and offer cardioprotection to hemorrhagic MI patients. Methods: MIRON-CL (NCT05898425) recruited and studied STEMI patients (n=294) reperfused via PCI. Pre-PCI coronary angiography allowed for assessment of collateral vessels using the Rentrop grading system, from Grade 0 (no collaterals) to Grade III (complete collateral filling). Post-PCI cardiac MRI, performed 3 days later, was used to determine area affected (extent of myocardial edema) from T2 maps, extent of IMH from T2* maps and MI size from LGE as %LV. Statistical analyses were used to examine relationships between collateral grades, MI size, IMH, and area affected. Results: 124 patients were hemorrhagic and 170 were non-hemorrhagic. Patients with no collaterals (Grade 0; CL-) exhibited significantly higher IMH volumes (7.41 ± 5.33% LV) compared to those with collaterals (Grade I: 5.23 ± 3.21% LV, Grade II: 3.11 ± 2.78% LV, Grade III: 2.05 ± 1.89% LV; p<0.001). Total area affected post-PCI was larger in CL- (37.62 ± 15.32% LV) compared to CL+ (21.48 ± 13.21% LV, p<0.001). Presence of collateral circulation (Grade>0 combined; CL+) was correlated with smaller MI sizes (CL-: 38.66 ± 14.63% LV vs. CL+: 19.84 ± 13.72% LV, p<0.001) and reduced MVO volumes (CL-: 8.07 ± 6.60% LV vs. CL+: 2.17 ± 2.35% LV, p<0.001). Patients with no collaterals had a significantly higher adj. risk of IMH (OR: 5.71, 95% CI: 3.16-10.33, p<0.0001). Conclusion: Coronary collaterals reduce post-reperfusion IMH volume in STEMI patients and provide significant cardioprotection: reductions in area affected, MVO and MI size. Insight into collateral grade offers opportunities to improve risk stratification and management of revascularized STEMI patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".