MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412855366 · doi:10.1016/j.ijcha.2025.101762

PCI for Chronic Total Occlusions with Distal Diffuse Disease: Stent Alone vs. Stent plus Drug Balloon

2025· article· en· W4412855366 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xinyi Yan, Yingying Hu, Jianlei Cao, Wei Zhang, Yi Lu, Jia Zhou, Qingqing Wu, Xiaorong Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueIJC Heart & Vasculature · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersZhongnan Hospital of Wuhan UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineConventional PCIStentDrug-eluting stentBalloonCardiologyInternal medicinePercutaneous coronary interventionCoronary artery diseaseRadiologyMyocardial infarctionRestenosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Chronic total occlusion (CTO) of coronary arteries is a significant challenge in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Despite successful revascularization, patients often develop diffuse coronary lesions, increasing the risk of restenosis and necessitating complex stent strategies. Objective: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DES) combined with drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty versus DES-only treatment in patients with revascularized CTO and diffuse coronary artery disease. Methods: Patients with successfully revascularized CTO and diffuse lesions were divided into DES-only (n = 191) and DES plus DCB (n = 100) groups. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including all-cause death, cardiac death, stroke, and revascularization. The secondary endpoint was the rate of cardiovascular-related hospitalization. Symptom improvement was evaluated using the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) classification. Results: At 24-month follow-up, the DES plus DCB group had significantly lower MACE incidence (26.00 % vs. 41.36 %, P = 0.008) and cardiovascular-related hospitalization (20.00 % vs. 36.65 %, P = 0.005) compared to the DES-only group. CCS classification improved more significantly in the DES plus DCB group (P < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression identified DES plus DCB as an independent protective factor against MACE (HR, 0.57; 95 % CI, 0.33-0.99; P = 0.046). Conclusion: In patients with revascularized CTO and diffuse coronary artery disease, the combined DES plus DCB strategy was associated with a lower incidence of MACE and reduced cardiovascular-related hospitalization compared to DES-only treatment. This approach may represent a superior therapeutic option for managing complex coronary lesions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.556
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIJC Heart & VasculatureSame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207