MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312122346 · doi:10.3389/fcvm.2022.1010342

Effect of cardiac shock wave therapy plus optimal medical therapy on rehospitalization in patients with severe coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

2022· review· en· W4312122346 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peng Li, Na Jia, Bing Liu, Qing He

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTakotsubo Cardiomyopathy and Associated Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseSubgroup analysisMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialRelative riskCardiologyClinical endpointCochrane LibraryClinical trialAnginaProspective cohort studyObservational studyConfidence intervalMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Several small sample-sized clinical studies have demonstrated that cardiac shock wave therapy (CSWT) might reduce the risk of rehospitalization in patients with severe coronary artery disease (CAD). However, other observational studies did not reported that clinical benefit of CSWT. Therefore, the effect of CSWT plus optimal medical therapy (OMT) on rehospitalization is still controversial. Methods: We performed an updated meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies identified in systematic searches of Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane library, the ClinicalTrials.gov website and Chinese SinoMed Database (up to December 2021). Primary endpoint was the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs, the composite outcome of mortality, coronary artery revascularization, and rehospitalization). Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were used to identify possible contributors to between-study variances in the HDRS. Required information size (RIS) was calculated with trial sequential analysis (TSA). Results: A total of 11 RCTs and 5 prospective cohort studies involving 1,149 patients with a mean follow-up of 10.3 months (range 3-72) months were included. Overall, CSWT plus OMT significantly decreased the rate of MACEs compared with the OMT group (RR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.29-0.53), which was mainly attributed to markedly lower risk of rehospitalization (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.27-0.51). Subgroup analysis showed that the pooled RRs for MACEs was significantly lower in studies enrolling patients with higher baseline Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina class (≥2.2) (RR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.26-0.50) or studies with short follow-up period (followed ≤ 6 months, RR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.24-0.64; followed 7-12 months, RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.26-0.54) or studies with HF with reduced ejection fraction (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.13-0.72) or with preserved ejection fraction (RR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.29-0.56). TSA showed that The RIS for MACE was 935, and the accrued information size was 577. Conclusion: Cardiac shock wave therapy plus OMT could decrease the rate of rehospitalization among patients with severe CAD. However, this result must be interpreted with caution, for the evidence supporting the use of CSWT for severe CAD is limited by the small sample size and short follow-up period of previous studies. Larger RCTs with longer follow-up are warranted to confirm these findings. Systematic review registration: [https://inplasy.com/], identifier [INPLASY202210103].

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.309
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.011
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.250 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cardiovascular MedicineSame topicTakotsubo Cardiomyopathy and Associated PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207