What has changed in the management of chronic ischaemic heart disease? The new European Society of Cardiology Guidelines 2024
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of chronic coronary syndromes expand the concept of CCS (chronic coronary syndrome), adopting a broader vision that includes structural and functional alterations throughout the coronary tree. A significant update concerns the stratification of coronary artery disease risk, with a central role played by the integration of cardiovascular risk factors. In the choice of diagnostic test, coronary computed axial tomography remains the 'gatekeeper' to exclude the disease in low-risk patients. Non-invasive functional tests are preferred in intermediate-high-risk patients, while coronary angiography is recommended for high-risk patients. There is renewed interest in angina and/or ischaemia in the absence of obstructive coronary artery disease (ANOCA/INOCA) patients, in whom the persistence of symptoms requires a complete invasive functional assessment to identify the specific endotype and personalize treatment. The therapeutic approach is characterized by a holistic vision of the patient. The role of aspirin in primary prevention is emphasized. In secondary prevention, revascularization remains essential, especially in patients with ejection fraction > 35% and high anatomical or ischaemic risk. Bypass is preferred in diabetics and patients with complex coronary anatomy, while percutaneous coronary intervention represents a valid alternative, supported by the aid of intracoronary imaging. Increased use of colchicine and semaglutide is recommended.
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 | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".