MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417356553 · doi:10.30701/ijc.1851

Could Cardiac Shockwave Therapy be the Breakthrough Solution for Refractory Angina? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· article· id· W4417356553 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Florentina D Pramesuari, Muhammad Reva Aditya, Mustika Mahbubi

Bibliographic record

VenueIndonesian Journal of Cardiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefractory (planetary science)Conventional PCIAnginaPerfusionClinical trialRandomized controlled trialCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyRanolazineCoronary artery disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Refractory angina (RA) is a chronic condition unresponsive to standard treatments like PCI or CABG, leaving limited options for many patients. Cardiac shockwave therapy (CSWT) is a novel, noninvasive approach that enhances myocardial perfusion through microvascular regeneration. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the effectiveness of CSWT in managing RA. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using electronic databases (Cochrane, PubMed, and ScienceDirect), including comparative studies with controls that evaluated CSWT in RA patients between 2010 and 2024. Studies not in English, with irrelevant outcomes, or lacking full-text access, were excluded. Data were extracted and analyzed using a random-effects model to address heterogeneity. Results: Seven studies, including 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 4 observational studies, with a total of 417 patients were analyzed. CSWT demonstrated significant improvements in multiple clinical outcomes. CSWT reduces angina severity in CSWT reduces angina severity in CCS grade (MD -0.76, 95% CI -0.97, -0.55, P < 0.00001) and in NYHA class (MD -0.62, 95% CI -0.95, -0.30, P = 0.0002), increased the 6- Minute Walk Test (6MWT) distance by 57.63 meters (MD 57.63, 95% CI 16.71, 98.54, P = 0.006), increased SAQ scores by 10.96 points (MD 10.96, 95% CI 1.66, 20.26, P = 0.02), improved LVEF by 4.43% (MD 4.43, 95% CI: 2.66 to 6.21, P< 0.01), and decreased nitroglycerin usage by 1.62 intake per week (MD -1.62, 95% CI -2.61, -0.62, P = 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in LVEDD between the two groups. Conclusion: CSWT appears to be a promising therapeutic option for patients with RA, demonstrating improvement in CCS angina class, NYHA class, 6-min walk test distances, SAQ score, LVEF, and reduces nitroglycerin usage. Keyword: Cardiac Shockwave Therapy, Refractory Angina, Non-invasive Cardiac Therapy, Chronic Angina Treatment, Innovative Angina Therapies

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndonesian Journal of CardiologySame topicTendon Structure and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207