ArticleHerz2020
Cardiac rehabilitation therapy for coronary slow flow phenomenon.
Article in Herz, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Coronary Slow-Flow Syndrome: A Review on Natural History of Disease and Best Practices.Research in heart yield and translational medicine · 2025Review
- Coronary slow flow research: a bibliometric analysis.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Effect of cardiac rehabilitation therapy on depressed patients with cardiac insufficiency after cardiac surgery.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2023Article
- Relationship Between Plasma Total Homocysteine Levels and Mean Corrected TIMI Frame Count in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.International journal of general medicine · 2021Article
- miRNA-22 as a Candidate Diagnostic Biomarker for Coronary Slow Flow.Cardiology research and practice · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation on coronary slow flow phenomenon.
methodIncluded were 30 consecutive patients from June 2015 to June 2017. A thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) frame evaluation was used to estimate coronary blood flow velocity. All coronary angiography diameters were normal, but blood flow levels did not reach the TIMI level 3. All patients were treated with aspirin and rosuvastatin. Patients were randomly assigned to an experimental group (cardiac rehabilitation treatment group, n = 15) or a control group (normal treatment without cardiac rehabilitation, n = 15). Plasma low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), triglyceride (TG), high-sensitivity C reactive protein (hs-CRP), homocysteine (Hcy) and arginine (Arg) expression levels were collected after admission. These indices were reviewed again after 20-30 weeks, improved subjective symptoms were evaluated by multiple outcome criteria (MOCs), and coronary angiography was used to evaluate the velocity of coronary artery blood flow.
resultThe expression levels of LDL-C and TG in the experimental group were significantly lower than those of the control group (both P < 0.01). The plasma levels of hs-CRP, Hcy and Arg were lower than those in the control group (all P < 0.01). In the experimental group, subjective symptoms of chest pain were significantly improved and the coronary artery blood flow velocity was significantly increased compared with the control group (P < 0.01).
conclusionCardiac rehabilitation can reduce the plasma levels of LDL-C, TG, hs-CRP, Hcy and Arg, significantly improve the symptoms of coronary slow flow phenomenon and accelerate the speed of coronary artery blood flow.
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.