Trial reportJournal of cardiovascular translational research2012
Pacing to reduce refractory angina in patients with severe coronary artery disease: a crossover pilot trial.
Trial report in Journal of cardiovascular translational research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biventricular pacing (BiV) has been shown to reduce wall stress and workload in regions near the pacing sites. This trial investigated if BiV near the ischemic region would reduce chest pain in patients with refractory angina due to severe coronary artery disease (CAD). Eleven patients were implanted with BiV devices with leads positioned at or adjacent to their ischemic regions as detected by single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and randomized to either pacing turned ON or OFF for 3 months, and then crossed over for 3 months. With pacing turned ON, a Dynamic atrioventricular (AV) delay was set for approximately 90% and 70% of the intrinsic AV delay at the resting heart rate and at the onset of symptoms, respectively. One patient was excluded from the analysis due to a large amount of RV pacing during the OFF periods (24-64%) and due to an inability to properly deliver therapy because of an excessive number of ventricular premature complexes. Overall, with the device ON vs. OFF, the number of angina episodes (0.8 ± 0.4 vs. 1.2 ± 0.7 per week, P = 0.03) and amount of nitroglycerin used (0.2 ± 0.1 vs. 1.0 ± 0.7 per week, P = 0.11) was lower with BiV pacing. Furthermore, the treadmill exercise time to symptoms trended higher (427 ± 65 vs. 408 ± 64 s, P = 0.19), and the sum of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) scores trended lower (7.9 ± 3.5 vs. 12.0 ± 4.0, P = 0.11) with the device ON vs. OFF. Nevertheless, there were no significant differences in SPECT myocardial perfusion scores, left ventricle ejection fraction, wall motion score index, and quality of life scores with device programmed ON vs. OFF (all P > 0.05). In conclusion, this pilot study demonstrated that BiV-P at or near the ischemic region was feasible and associated with significant reductions in angina in patients with severe CAD. Adequately powered prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.