MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2982121794 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz748.0270

P1508The Coronary Arteriogenesis with combined Heparin and Exercise therapy in chronic refractory Angina (CARHEXA) trial: a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled stress echocardiographic study

2019· article· en· W2982121794 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marija Petrović, Ana Djordjevic‐Dikic, Jelena Stepanović, Vojislav Giga, N Boskovic, Vladan Vukcevic, Vladimir Cvetić, Ana Mladenović, Oliver Radmili, Željko Marković, Dimitra Kalimanovska‐Oštrić, S Aleksadric, Miodrag Ostojić, Branko Beleslin, E. Picano

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyEjection fractionInternal medicineCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyCoronary artery diseaseAnginaRevascularizationPlaceboCollateral circulationVentricleRandomized controlled trialHeart failureMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Coronary collateral circulation exerts protective effects on myocardial ischemia due to coronary artery disease (CAD) and can be promoted by exercise (E) with heparin (H) co-administration. Whether this arteriogenetic effects is accompanied by functional improvement of left ventricle (LV) during stress remains unknown. Purpose To establish the stress-induced functional effects on LV regional and global function of 2-week cycle of H+E in patients with “no-option” CAD. Methods In a prospective, single-center, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study we recruited 32 “no-option” patients (27 males; mean age of 61±8 years), with stable angina and CTO, refractory to OMT, not suitable for revascularization and with E-induced ischemia. All underwent 2-week cycle of E (2 E test per day, 5 days a week) and were pre-treated with i.v. 0.9% saline or unfractionated H (100 IU/kg up to maximum of 5.000IU, 10 min prior to E). Canadian Class Score (CCS) and 12-lead E-ECG for time-to-1 mm ST-segment depression were assessed at entry and after treatment. LV function was evaluated during treadmill exercise with conventional and advanced imaging indices: Wall Motion Score Index (WMSI); Ejection Fraction (EF); Force (systolic blood pressure/end-systolic volume); Global Longitudinal Strain (GLS). Results Post-treatment exercise-time and CCS improved in both groups. In H+E patients exercise-time improved from 369.8±107.8 sec to 475.3±114.6 sec (p=0.001) while in E patients improved from 384±152.7 sec to 464.8±134.1 sec (p=0.019). CCS score changed in H+E from 2.6±0.7 to 1.9±0.7 (p=0.000), and in E group from 2.4±0.7 to 2.1±0.9 (p=0.046). At peak exercise, H+E was different from E group for EF and GLS (see Table). Effects of H+E on SE parameters H+E p P+E p *H+E vs P+E STRESS Time 0 vs Time 1 Time 0 vs Time 1 Time 0 Time 1 WMSI 1.377 vs 1.279 0.005 1.404 vs 1.376 0.290 0.626 0.255 EF (%) 60.9 vs 64.8 0.016 61.2 vs 57.8 0.284 0.943 0.016 Force (mmHg/mL) 6.36 vs 6.5 0.158 5.82 vs 4.68 0.209 0.760 0.098 GLS (%) −16.96 vs −18.50 0.001 −15.79 vs −15.60 0.380 0.325 0.027 SE = stress echocardiography; H+E = heparin+exercise; P+E = placebo+exercise; Time 0 = before randomization; Time 1 = after 2-week therapy cycle. *p values. Conclusion A 2-week, H+E cycle is associated with improvement in regional and global LV function during exercise, concordantly shown by conventional (WMSI, EF) and advanced (GLS) echocardiographic indices of LV function. This integrates and supplements the classical objective index based on ST-segment depression, unable to localize and quantify the functional consequences of therapy on myocardial ischemia.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→