ReviewCureus2024
Evaluating the Efficacy of Coronary Sinus Reducer Implantation in the Management of Refractory Angina: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The efficacy and safety of coronary sinus reducer in refractory angina: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Coronary Sinus Reducer: History, Current Applications, and Future Perspectives.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The coronary sinus reducer (CSR), a minimally invasive device, has emerged as a promising alternative for improving myocardial perfusion in these patients. This meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of CSR implantation in patients with refractory angina. A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases identified 10 relevant studies with a pooled sample size of 799 patients. The analysis focused on changes in the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) classification score, Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) score, and six-minute walk distance (6MWD) from baseline to follow-up. Results showed significant improvements across all measured outcomes. CCS scores decreased significantly post-CSR implantation, indicating reduced angina severity. SAQ scores improved across all domains, including physical limitation, anginal stability, anginal frequency, treatment satisfaction, and quality of life, suggesting enhanced overall well-being. The 6MWD also increased significantly, reflecting improved functional capacity. These findings highlight CSR's potential as an effective treatment option for patients with refractory angina who have exhausted traditional therapies. CSR implantation appears to alleviate angina symptoms, improve quality of life, and enhance exercise tolerance. Future research should prioritize larger, multi-center randomized controlled trials to validate these findings. Long-term follow-up studies are needed to assess sustained benefits and potential risks.
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.