MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402070135 · doi:10.1136/openhrt-2024-002772

Sildenafil’s effectiveness in the primary coronary slow flow phenomenon: a pilot randomised controlled clinical trial

2024· article· en· W4402070135 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abbas Andishmand, Seyedmostafa Seyedhosseini, Seyedeh Mahdieh Namayandeh, Elnaz Adelzadeh, Amin Entezari, Seyed Reza Mirjalili

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Heart · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSildenafilMedicineRandomized controlled trialCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: On the one hand, the primary coronary slow flow phenomenon (CSFP) can cause recurrence of chest pain, prompting medical examinations and further healthcare costs, while on the other hand, it can lead to myocardial infarction, ventricular arrhythmia and sudden cardiac death. Nevertheless, there is not any agreement on the optimal treatment for primary CSFP, so we decided to examine the effectiveness of sildenafil in this context. METHODS: This pilot study is a 12-week, triple-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial for receiving either 50 mg daily oral sildenafil or placebo. Twenty eligible patients aged 30-70 years from a tertiary hospital in Yazd were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to two groups. The primary outcomes were the alterations in functional capacity (metabolic equivalents, METs), Duke treadmill score (DTS) and angina severity (Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class). The study protocol registration code is IRCT20220223054103N1. RESULTS: The angina severity in the Sildenafil group improved, with all receivers achieving a state of being asymptomatic during regular physical activity (CCS I). Whereas just 40% of the recipients in the placebo group achieved the same level of improvement (p=0.011). Mean METs at baseline were 9.9 (SD: 3.1) and at week 12 were 13.1 (SD: 3.3) for sildenafil and 9.56 (SD: 2.1) and 9.63 (SD: 2.4) for placebo (difference favouring sildenafil with a median increase of 3.1 (IQR: 1.1 to 4.1, p=0.008)). Median DTS scores at baseline were 3 (IQR: 0 to 9) and at week 12 were 9.5 (IQR: 7.75 to 15) for sildenafil and 7 (IQR: -1.5 to 9.25) and 8 (IQR: 1.5 to 11.25) for placebo (difference favouring sildenafil with a median increase of 5.5 (IQR: 1 to 9.2, p=0.01)). CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that a daily low dose of sildenafil could be a valuable therapeutic option for primary CSFP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: IRCT20220223054103N1.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.329 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen HeartSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207