[An experience of the use of a curative method of cardiac shock wave therapy in patients with ischemic heart disease].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim of the study was to assess effects of cardiac shock wave therapy (CSWT) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) with refractory stable angina pectoris. Seventeen CAD patients with refractory II-IV class angina (3 women and 14 men, mean age 67.4+/-8.6 years) received the course of 9 procedures of CSWT. All patients had I-III New York Heart Association (NYHA) class congestive heart failure. Before and after CSWT medical examination with life quality assessment by means of the Minnesota Living Questionnaire, echocardiography, veloergometry, myocardial perfusion imaging with single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) using 99M-Tc-methyl-iodine-benzyl-guanydin (MIBG) and Holter ECG monitoring was performed. The dynamics of pro-angiogenic factors (VEGF, HGF, FGF-) were also measured by ELISA, and of brain natriuretic peptide (Nt-proBNP) by the electrochemoluminescence method. Most patients (80%) had significant life quality (<0.01) and myocardial perfusion improvement. Episodes of angina pectoris and nitrate intake were more than twice decreased. There was a significant increase in exercise tolerance (p<0.01). Holter ECG monitoring showed decreasing of an average heart rate (p<0.02); no worsening of previous cardiac arrhythmias was observed. The significant (p<0.05) decreases in plasma Nt-proBNP and increases in VEGF concentration were revealed after CSWT. CSWT procedures were well tolerated. The results of our study confirm high effectiveness and safety of CSWT in complex treatment of patients with CAD, resistant angina pectoris, including patients after myocardial revascularization and with heart failure.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".