Cardiac shockwave therapy in addition to coronary bypass surgery improves myocardial function in ischaemic heart failure: the CAST-HF trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In chronic ischaemic heart failure, revascularisation strategies control symptoms but are less effective in improving left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). The aim of this trial is to investigate the safety of cardiac shockwave therapy (SWT) as a novel treatment option and its efficacy in increasing cardiac function by inducing angiogenesis and regeneration in hibernating myocardium. METHODS: In this single-blind, parallel-group, sham-controlled trial (cardiac shockwave therapy for ischemic heart failure, CAST-HF; NCT03859466) patients with LVEF ≤40% requiring surgical revascularisation were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo direct cardiac SWT or sham treatment in addition to coronary bypass surgery. The primary efficacy endpoint was the improvement in LVEF measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging from baseline to 360 days. RESULTS: Overall, 63 patients were randomized, out of which 30 patients of the SWT group and 28 patients of the Sham group attained 1-year follow-up of the primary endpoint. Greater improvement in LVEF was observed in the SWT group (Δ from baseline to 360 days: SWT 11.3%, SD 8.8; Sham 6.3%, SD 7.4, P = .0146). Secondary endpoints included the 6-minute walking test, where patients randomized in the SWT group showed a greater Δ from baseline to 360 days (127.5 m, SD 110.6) than patients in the Sham group (43.6 m, SD 172.1) (P = .028) and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score on day 360, which was 11.0 points (SD 19.1) for the SWT group and 17.3 points (SD 15.1) for the Sham group (P = .15). Two patients in the treatment group died for non-device-related reasons. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the CAST-HF trial indicates that direct cardiac SWT, in addition to coronary bypass surgery improves LVEF and physical capacity in patients with ischaemic heart failure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".