ArticlePloS one2017
Evaluation of the systemic micro- and macrovasculature in stable angina: A case-control study.
Article in PloS one, 2017. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe diagnosis of stable angina involves the use of probability estimates based on clinical presentation, age, gender and cardiovascular risk factors. In view of the link between the cardiac and systemic vasculature we tested whether non-invasive measures of systemic micro- and macrovascular structure and function differentiate between individuals with flow-limiting coronary artery disease (CAD) and those with normal coronary arteries (NCA). METHODS AND
resultsWe recruited 84 patients undergoing elective coronary angiography for investigation of symptoms of stable angina. Patients were selected for either having significant CAD or NCA (n = 43/41; age, 56±7 vs 57±7 years, P = 0.309). Only microvascular endothelial function, measured using the Endo-PAT2000 device to determine reactive hyperaemia index (CAD vs. NCA; 1.9 [1.5; 2.3] vs. 2.1 [1.8; 2.4], P = 0.03) and sonographic carotid plaque score (CAD vs. NCA; 3.0 [1.5; 4.5] vs. 1.2 [0; 2.55], P<0.001) were significantly different between patients with CAD and NCA. No significant differences were detected in reflection magnitude (CAD vs. NCA; 1.7 [1.5; 1.8] % vs 1.7 [1.5; 1.9] %, P = 0.342), pulse wave velocity (CAD vs. NCA; 7.8±1.4 m/sec vs. 8.3±1.5 m/sec, P = 0.186), carotid intima-media thickness (CAD vs. NCA; 0.73±0.10 mm vs. 0.75±0.10 mm, P = 0.518) or carotid distensibility (CAD vs. NCA; 3.8±1.2 10-3/kPa vs. 3.4±0.9 10-3/kPa, P = 0.092). Also, the c-statistic of the pre-test probability based on history and traditional risk factors (c = 0.665; 95% CI, 0.540-0.789) was improved by the addition of the inverse RHI (c = 0.720; 95% CI, 0.605-0.836), carotid plaque score (c = 0.770, 95% CI, 0.659-0.881), and of both markers in combination (c = 0.801; 95% CI, 0.701-0.900).
conclusionThere are distinct differences in the systemic vasculature between patients with CAD and NCA that may have the potential to guide diagnostic and therapeutic decisions. Carotid artery plaque burden and microvascular function appear to be most promising in this context.
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.