MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982123882 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz748.1003

P2685Improving myocardial perfusion in refractory angina: extracorporeal shockwave myocardial revascularization in a monocentric cohort

2019· article· en· W2982123882 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Salvatore D’Amico, Gianluca Alunni, M D'Amico, Maoyong Fu, Dario Celentani, Stefano Pidello, Alessandro Brustio, Marco Campana, Massimo Baccega, Carla Giustetto, S Marra, Marta Casaloni Rinaldi

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyRevascularizationAnginaEjection fractionRefractory (planetary science)Heart failureMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The incidence of patients with refractory angina (RA) is increasing. Medical therapy for RA is limited and prognosis is poor. Experimental data and small clinical studies suggest that the use of Extracorporeal shockwave myocardial revascularization (ESMR) may contribute to angiogenesis and improve symptoms in patients with RA. Purpose The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of ESMR in the improvement of myocardial perfusion and symptoms in patients with RA. Methods Patients with RA despite optimal medical therapy and not suitable for further myocardial revascularization were enrolled and underwent ESMR. Characteristics such as angina class scores (CCS class score), nitroglycerin consumption and hospitalization rate among cases (patients with RA who received ESMR) and controls (patients with RA who did not receive ESMR) were compared at baseline and 6 months after ESMR therapy. In patients receiving ESMR the effect of on cardiac perfusion was assessed at six months. Results Among screened patients, 159 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. 151 patients were enrolled in the present study and 121 treated with ESMR. There were 121 patients in the treatment group and 29 patients in the control group. The mean age of the patients was 70±8.8 years in the case group and 71±5.3 years in the control group. Other characteristics were similar in both groups. After ESMR myocardial perfusion by SPECT significantly improved: mean SSS was reduced from 21.2±9.42 to 14.2±10, with a 33% relative reduction (p=0.0001). Clinical follow up of both group demonstrated a significant improvement CCS class score at six months (1.5±0.6 in treatment and 1.92±0.69 in controls; p 0.0013) a significant improvement NYHA class score (1.4±0.6 in cases and 1.73±0.59 in controls; p 0.008); also, nitroglycerin consumption (29% in case cases, and 44.8% in controls; P 0.15) and hospitalization rate were reduced in the treatment group compared to control (16% vs. 37.9%; P 0.02). Clinical outcome of two groups at 6 months follow up Treatment group (n=121) Control group (n=29) p CCS class 1.5±0.6 1.92±0.7 <0.001 NYHA class 1.4±0.6 1.7±0.6 <0.008 Nitrates uptake 35 (29%) 13 (45%) <0.15 Admission to emergency department 20 (16%) 11 (38%) <0.02 SPECT results after 6 months follow up Conclusion ESMR therapy is a non-invasive safe and potentially effective new option for patients with refractory angina. This study confirms the beneficial effect of ESMR therapy on cardiac symptoms, myocardial perfusion and hospitalizations in patients with refractory angina.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207