Antithrombotic therapy after coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a Clinical Consensus Statement of the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery, the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy, and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antithrombotic therapy is essential after coronary artery bypass graft surgery to reduce ischaemic events and prevent graft occlusion. Although aspirin remains the most commonly used agent, in higher-risk patients, dual antiplatelet therapy or combining antiplatelet therapy with oral anticoagulation may be beneficial, but this increases bleeding risk. The choice of antithrombotic therapy should be tailored to each patient, based on their ischaemic and bleeding risks, and regularly reassessed. Here, the scientific evidence underlying the key aspects of the choice of antithrombotic therapy after coronary artery bypass grafting is reviewed. Consensus statements for best clinical practice are provided and areas requiring further research are highlighted.
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 | 0.147 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.052 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".