ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023
Observation of the effectiveness of clinical indicators of cardiac shock wave therapy in patients with ischemic heart disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Ischemic heart disease (IHD) has a high prevalence and mortality rate, imposing a heavy burden on patients and society, and there is still a need to optimize treatment options for IHD patients. Cardiac shock wave therapy (CSWT) is gaining popularity as a new treatment for IHD patients. The objective of this meta-analysis is to reassess the effects of CSWT on IHD patients in light of the limited number of clinical studies included in previously published reviews, inconsistent methodological quality, and unclear outcomes. Methods: From database creation until September 1, 2022, 4 English databases and 3 Chinese databases were rigorously searched for any current controlled trials of CSWT for IHD. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used for methodological quality assessment. Review Manager v.5.4 software was used for meta-analysis. Results: Nineteen published controlled trials totaling 1,254 subjects were included. Results showed that CSWT could enhance left ventricular function and myocardial viability, improve cardiac function and alleviate angina pectoris symptoms. The effects of CSWT and control groups on SAQ scores and exercise time were not statistically significant. Conclusion: According to this systematic review and meta-analysis, CSWT may be beneficial for a number of IHD clinical indications. To verify these findings, more RCT studies with bigger sample numbers and higher methodological standards are required in the future.
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.