Trial reportJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2019
Magnetic stimulation of carotid sinus as a treatment for hypertension.
Trial report in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Magnetic stimulation of carotid sinus as a treatment for hypertension.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2019Trial
- Central nervous system mechanisms of salt-sensitive hypertension.Physiological reviews · 2025Review
- Current perspectives on regenerative potential of mesenchymal stem cells in alleviating cardiac injuries: Molecular pathways and therapeutic enhancement.World journal of stem cells · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previously, we reported that magnetic stimulation of carotid sinus (MSCS) could lower arterial pressure in rabbits. In this randomized, sham-controlled pilot study, we evaluated the effects of MSCS on blood pressure in pre-hypertensive and hypertensive subjects. A total of 15 subjects with blood pressure higher than 130/80 mm Hg were randomized to receive sham or 1Hz MSCS. The changes of systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean blood pressure (MAP) during treatment were compared between groups. The heart rate variability (HRV) and baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) before, during, and after treatments were analyzed. Reduction of SBP was significantly greater in subjects with MSCS than those with sham stimulation (6.6 ± 0.4 vs -2.5 ± 0.4 mm Hg, P < 0.001). Reduction of DBP was significantly greater in subjects with MSCS than those with sham stimulation (1.2 ± 0.2 vs -2.8 ± 0.2 mm Hg, P < 0.001). Reduction of MAP was significantly greater in subjects with MSCS than those with sham stimulation (1.4 ± 0.3 mm Hg vs -4.0 ± 0.3 mm Hg, P < 0.001). Reduction of HR was significantly greater in subjects with MSCS than those with sham stimulation (0.5 ± 0.5 vs -1.9 ± 0.3 beats/min, P = 0.002). BRS increased from 6.85 ± 0.77 to 8.79 ± 0.95 ms/mm Hg after MSCS compared with that at baseline (P = 0.027). Thus, MSCS can lower blood pressure and heart rate in pre-hypertensive and hypertensive subject, warranting further study for establishing MSCS as a treatment for hypertension.
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.