ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2021
Coronary Sinus Reducer for the Treatment of Chronic Refractory Angina: Will This Challenge the Treatment of Coronary Chronic Total Occlusions?
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2021. 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, 2 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe prevalence of angina despite optimal medical therapy is high among patients with coronary chronic total occlusions. Despite advancements in techniques and operator's experience, percutaneous revascularization of coronary chronic total occlusions is still associated with a not negligible risk of failures and complications. The Coronary Sinus Reducer, a new device developed to improve angina, has shown promising results in terms of efficacy and safety in patients with refractory symptoms. The aim of this review is to summarize the evidence so far available and to guide clinicians in the selection of patients with chronic total occlusions that could benefit more from Coronary Sinus Reducer implantation. RECENT
findingsA recently published study suggests a clear value of this device in patients with chronic total occlusions. This is likely to be related to the presence of a well-developed collateral circulation. A careful evaluation of risks and benefits of both myocardial revascularization and Coronary Sinus Reducer implantation should be done in all the cases in order to better define the optimal strategy for the patient. The Coronary Sinus Reducer implantation has a rationale in patients with chronic total occlusion as an alternative or additional therapy to myocardial revascularization.
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.