Effects of coronary sinus Reducer implantation on oxygen kinetics in patients with refractory angina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Refractory angina is still a major public health problem. The coronary sinus Reducer (CSR) has recently been introduced as an alternative treatment to reduce symptoms in these patients. The aim of this study was to investigate objective improvements in effort tolerance and oxygen kinetics as assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in patients suffering from refractory angina undergoing CSR implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this multicentre prospective study, patients with chronic refractory angina undergoing CSR implantation were scheduled for CPET before the index procedure and at six-month follow-up. The main endpoints of this analysis were improvements in VO2 max and in VO2 at the anaerobic threshold (AT). Clinical events and improvements in symptoms were also recorded. A total of 37 patients formed the study population. The CSR implantation procedure was successful and without complications in all. At follow-up CPET, significant improvement in VO2 max (+0.97 ml/kg/min [+11.3%]; 12.2±3.6 ml/kg/min at baseline vs 13.2±3.7 ml/kg/min, p=0.026), and workload (+12.9 [+34%]; 68±28 W vs 81±49 W, p=0.05) were observed, with non-significant differences in VO2 at the AT (9.84±3.4 ml/kg/min vs 10.74±3.05 ml/kg/min, p=0.06). Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) grade improved from a mean of 3.2±0.5 to 1.6±0.8 (p<0.01), and significant benefits in all Seattle Angina Questionnaire variables were shown. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with obstructive coronary artery disease suffering from refractory angina, the implantation of a CSR was associated with objective improvement in exercise capacity and oxygen kinetics at CPET, suggesting a possible reduction of myocardial ischaemia.
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".