MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Improvement of fractional flow reserve and collateral flow by treatment with external counterpulsation (Art.Net.‐2 Trial)

2009· article· en· W2092908561 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eva Buschmann, Wolfgang Utz, Nikolaos Pagonas, Jeanette Schulz‐Menger, Andreas Busjahn, Jan Monti, Winfried Maerz, Ferdinand le Noble, Ludwig Thierfelder, Rainer Dietz, Volker Klauß, Ivo Buschmann

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Clinical Investigation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineCollateral circulationCoronary artery diseaseArteriogenesisClinical endpointStenosisPercutaneous coronary interventionFractional flow reserveHemodynamicsArteryCoronary flow reserveCardiac catheterizationRandomized controlled trialMyocardial infarctionIschemiaCoronary angiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Arteriogenesis (collateral artery growth) is nature's most efficient rescue mechanism to overcome the fatal consequences of arterial occlusion or stenosis. The goal of this trial was to investigate the effect of external counterpulsation (ECP) on coronary collateral artery growth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 23 patients (age 61 +/- 2.5 years) with stable coronary artery disease and at least one haemodynamic significant stenosis eligible for percutaneous coronary intervention were prospectively recruited into the two study groups in a 2 : 1 manner (ECP : control). One group (ECP group, n = 16) underwent 35 1-h sessions of ECP in 7 weeks. In the control group (n = 7), the natural course of collateral circulation over 7 weeks was evaluated. All patients underwent a cardiac catheterization at baseline and after 7 weeks, with invasive measurements of the pressure-derived collateral flow index (CFIp, primary endpoint) and fractional flow reserve (FFR). RESULTS: In the ECP group, the CFIp (from 0.08 +/- 0.01 to 0.15 +/- 0.02; P < 0.001) and FFR (from 0.68 +/- 0.03 to 0.79 +/- 0.03; P = 0.001) improved significantly, while in the control group no change was observed. Only the ECP group showed a reduction of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS, P = 0.008) and New York Heart Association (NYHA, P < 0.001) classification. CONCLUSION: In this study, we provide direct functional evidence for the stimulation of coronary arteriogenesis via ECP in patients with stable coronary artery disease. These data might open a novel noninvasive and preventive treatment avenue for patients with non-acute vascular stenotic disease.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations63
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Clinical InvestigationSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207