Various protocols of extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the treatment of stable angina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim. To evaluate effects of various protocols of cardiac shock wave therapy (CSWT) on quality of life and exercise tolerance in patients with stable angina against the background of optimal medication therapy (OMT). Material and methods . Overall 53 patients (37 men, 16 women) were included in the study. The mean age of examined patients was 67,3 ±8,1 years. Inclusion criteria: CCS class I-IV angina pectoris, stable therapy for at least 1 month before inclusion in the study and a stable course of coronary artery disease for more than 3 months (no cardiovascular events) before inclusion in the study. Patients were divided into 2 groups. The Group 1 (n=37) received OMT+CSWT standard-modified protocol, Group 2 (n=16) received OMT+CSWT rapid-modified protocol. Electrocardiography, echocardiography, treadmill test, and Seattle quality of life questionnaire (SAQ) were performed at inclusion and 6 months follow up. Results. Both CSWT with rapid-modified protocol and standard-modified protocol significantly reduced the number of short-acting nitrates from 2 (2; 7) to 1 (0; 2) (p=0,04) and from 2 (0; 6) to 0 (0; 2) (p ≤0,001) at 6 months, respectively, as well as the number of angina attacks per week (from 4 (2; 7) to 1 (1; 1) (p=0,007) and 6 (2; 20) to 1 (0; 5) (p ≤0,001). Treadmill test total exercise duration was significantly increased from 393 (326; 574) to 561 (411; 650) seconds (p=0,007) and 365+140,4 to 411,5±156,1 seconds (p=0,01), respectively. Time to 1 mm ST segment depression was also significantly increased from 399,8+169 to 460+182 seconds (p ≤0,05) and from 303,1+179 to 389,9+203 seconds (p=0,001), respectively. Conclusion. In our study, CSWT with rapid-modified protocol improved quality of life and exercise tolerance in patients with stable angina similar to the standard-modified protocol. Rapid-modified protocol of CSWT reduced total duration of the treatment.
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) | 0.001 | 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".