Extracorporeal shockwave myocardial revascularization improves clinical symptoms and left ventricular function in patients with refractory angina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Medical therapy for refractory angina is limited and the prognosis is poor. Experimental data suggest that the use of extracorporeal shockwave myocardial revascularization (ESMR) can contribute to angiogenesis and improve symptoms of angina and left ventricular (LV) function. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of ESMR on clinical symptoms as well as LV function as assessed by cardiac MRI in patients with refractory angina. METHODS: Patients with Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class III-IV angina despite medical therapy and ischemia documented on thallium or echo-dobutamine were eligible for the study. ESMR therapy was applied with a commercially available cardiac shockwave generator system under echocardiographic guidance. LV function was assessed before and 6 months after therapy by cardiac MRI. RESULTS: Twenty patients (four women, 16 men; mean age 64 years, range 45-83) were included in the study. The CCS class after treatment improved in all patients (16 patients angina pectoris CCS from III to II and four patients from IV to III). The use of sublingual nitroglycerin was significantly reduced as well. There was a significant improvement in LV ejection fraction as assessed by blinded MRI following therapy in the overall population (51 vs. 59%, P<0.05). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the potential efficacy of ESMR for the treatment of refractory angina pectoris. The patients showed both a significant clinical response as well as improved LV ejection fraction on serial MRI imaging. Larger studies are needed to adequately define the clinical utility of this novel therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".