TIMI Frame Count and Coronary Function in Women With Suspected Ischemia and Nonobstructed Coronary Arteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data have been inconsistent regarding the association between TIMI frame count (TFC) and coronary function, with data suggesting that the TFC measured after pharmacological stress could correlate better with coronary physiology. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the correlation of TFC after pharmacological stress with coronary function among women with suspected ischemia and no obstructed coronary arteries (INOCA). METHODS: Women with suspected INOCA enrolled in the WISE-CVD (Women's Ischemic Syndrome Evaluation-Coronary Vascular Dysfunction) study (NCT00832702) underwent coronary angiography with coronary function testing, to measure coronary flow reserve to adenosine, change in coronary blood flow and diameter in response to acetylcholine, and change in coronary diameter in response to nitroglycerine (ΔNTG). In a randomly selected subgroup, TFC was quantified at baseline and after pharmacological stress. The association of TFC (postpharmacological stress, rest-to-stress ratio, and percentage change from rest to stress) with measurements of coronary function was assessed with linear regression. RESULTS: TFC was quantified among 75 women, with a mean age of 54 ± 12 years. Among them, 29 (42%) had hypertension, 7 (10%) had diabetes, 34 (48%) had a previous smoking history, and 33 (49%) women had coronary atherosclerosis. Minor positive correlations were found linking higher TFC poststress with higher coronary flow reserve and higher ΔNTG (P < 0.05). Minor inverse correlations were found when using the TFC rest-to-stress ratio postacetylcholine and ΔNTG (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Among women with suspected INOCA, measuring the TFC poststress did not help in the identification of abnormal coronary physiology pathways. Other strategies should be developed to improve accessibility to coronary function testing in this population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".