Coronary Sinus Narrowing Improves Coronary Microcirculation Function in Patients With Refractory Angina: A Multicenter Prospective INROAD Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The underlying mechanisms responsible for the clinical benefits following coronary sinus narrowing and pressure elevation remain unclear. The present study aims to investigate whether coronary sinus narrowing improves the indexes of coronary microcirculatory function. METHODS: Patients with refractory angina who had a clinical indication for reducer implantation underwent invasive physiological assessments before and 4 months after the procedure. The primary outcome was the change in the values of the index of microcirculatory resistance. Secondary end points included changes in coronary flow reserve and the resistive resistance ratio values. Angina status was assessed with the Canadian Cardiology Society class and the Seattle Angina Questionnaire. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients with a history of obstructive coronary artery disease and prior coronary revascularization (surgical and percutaneous) treated with reducer implantation were enrolled, and 21 of them (87%) underwent repeated invasive coronary physiological assessment after 4 months. The index of microcirculatory resistance values decreased from 33.35±19.88 at baseline to 15.42±11.36 at 4-month follow-up ( P <0.001; mean difference, −17.90 [95% CI, −26.16 to −9.64]). A significant (≥20% from baseline) reduction of the index of microcirculatory resistance was observed in 15 (71.4% [95% CI, 47.8%–88.7%]) patients. The number of patients with abnormal index of microcirculatory resistance (≥25) decreased from 12 (57%) to 4 (19%; P =0.016). Coronary flow reserve increased from 2.46±1.52 to 4.20±2.52 (mean difference, 1.73 [95% CI, 0.51–2.96]). Similar findings were observed for resistive resistance ratio values. Overall, 16 patients (76.1%) had an improvement of 1 Canadian Cardiology Society class. Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score increase of around 3 points (3.01 [95% CI, 1.39–4.61]). CONCLUSIONS: Coronary sinus reduction implantation is associated with a significant improvement in the parameters of coronary microcirculatory function. These findings provide insights into the improvement of angina symptoms and may have implications for the treatment of coronary microvascular dysfunction. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT05174572.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".