Long-Term, Time-Dependent Effects of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Refractory Angina Pectoris: A Prospective, Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: There is ongoing debate about the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for refractory angina pectoris (RAP), but there are few long-term (>one year) studies of clinical, cardiac, and psychosocial efficacy. The objective of this study was to provide a comprehensive long-term longitudinal clinical and psychosocial analysis of SCS in patients with RAP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, longitudinal cohort study in patients with RAP receiving SCS at a tertiary referral center in Poland. Patients were assessed for clinical (Canadian Cardiovascular Society [CCS], New York Heart Association [NYHA] status), heart function (two-dimensional echocardiography, exercise tolerance test), pain (visual analog and Laitinen scales), nitroglycerin (GTN) use, and quality of life (Seattle Angina Questionnaire [SAQ], Beck Depression Inventory, and Satisfaction With Life Scale) metrics six months before SCS implantation and six and 36 months after implantation. Differences in variables before and after surgery were assessed with Friedman's rank or repeated-measures analysis of variance with distribution-appropriate post hoc tests and multiple comparison correction. RESULTS: Of 21 enrolled participants, 18 completed the study and remained using SCS and fully independent at 36 months. CCS grade and NYHA class significantly improved after the procedure (p < 0.0001), with all patients improving to CCS grade 2 (88.9%) or 1 (5.6%). Ejection fraction significantly increased from a mean (SD) of 44.7% (15.8%) six months before SCS implantation to 56.2% (12.2%) at 36 months (p < 0.001). Pain scores significantly decreased from baseline to 36 months (p < 0.001), with most of the effect observed within the first six months, with corresponding decreases in GTN use. SCS had a time-dependent and significant positive impact on all domains measured by the SAQ (p < 0.001 for all domains), depressive symptoms, and overall life satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: This study helps to resolve the debate on SCS efficacy in patients with RAP. There were significant quantitative increases in all treatment effects over time, suggesting cumulative physiological mechanisms that mandate sufficient follow-up in clinical trials to fully assess outcomes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".