Case Series: Extracorporeal Shockwave Myocardial Revascularization Therapy Improves Ischemic Response, Functional Capacity, and Quality of Life in Indicated CABG-Stable Angina Pectoris Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Extracorporeal shockwave myocardial revascularization (ESMR) is included in the guidelines only for patients with refractory angina pectoris having no option for invasive revascularization. We intend to report a case series with ESMR therapy is indicated patients with coronary artery bypass grafting-stable angina pectoris (CABG-SAP) who refuse the surgery, irrespective of angina symptoms. METHODS: We review medical records of patients with SAP admitted to ESMR therapy in Dr. Hasan Sadikin General Hospital, Bandung, Indonesia from January 2018 to December 2019. Recorded variables at baseline and after therapy extracted, namely, (1) ischemic response, double product, and (2) functional capacity measured as metabolic equivalent (MET) using treadmill test; (3) six-minute walking test distance achieved; and (4) quality of life using SF-36 Questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of four indicated patients with CABG-SAP from 50 to 75 years old were included in this study. At baseline, one patient is CCS class I and two patients are CCS class II with SDS ranging from 3 to 17. Ischemic response improved in all the patients. The double product improved in patient 1 9,600-14,872 mm Hg × bpm, patient 2 9,460-10,640 mm Hg × bpm, and patient 4 17,220-20,480 mm Hg × bpm. The functional capacity improved in Patient 1 8.07-8.91 METs, patient 2 1.91-4.01 METs, patient 3 3.45-6.39 METs, and patient 4 3.9-4.43 METs. The 6-min walking distance improved in patient 1 540-570 m and patient 2 345-405 m. The CCS class, bodily pain, and general health domain scores improved in all patients. CONCLUSION: ESMR therapy might be beneficial for indicated patients with CABG-SAP to improve ischemic response, functional capacity, and physical component of quality of life.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".