ArticleVascular health and risk management2025
The Effectiveness and Safety of Cardiac Shock Wave Therapy in the Treatment of Ischemic Heart Disease with Refractory Angina Pectoris.
Article in Vascular health and risk management, 2025. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study investigated the efficacy and safety profile of cardiac shock wave therapy (CSWT) in the treatment of ischemic heart disease (IHD) with refractory angina pectoris. Methods: A single-arm, pre-post prospective cohort study was conducted on 65 patients with IHD and refractory angina pectoris who were treated at the Department of Cardiology, 108 Military Central Hospital, between March 2015 and March 2021. The participants were prospectively monitored over a 6-month follow-up period. Results: Significant improvements were observed in angina symptoms, 6-minute walk test performance, Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) angina classification, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class. N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels decreased from 942.75 pg/mL to 410.45 pg/mL. Echocardiographic parameters demonstrated enhanced cardiac function, with the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) increasing from 43.89 ± 12.27% to 48.48 ± 10.57% (p < 0.05). The wall motion septal index (WMSI) decreased from 1.54 ± 0.18 to 1.24 ± 0.12, while global longitudinal strain (GLS) improved from -10.28 ± 2.82 to -12.74 ± 2.42. Myocardial perfusion imaging revealed marked reductions in summed stress score (SSS: 17.45 ± 8.61 vs 12.18 ± 7.89), summed rest score (SRS: 11.09 ± 7.74 vs 9.46 ± 7.23), and summed difference score (SDS: 4.37 ± 2.31 vs 2.57 ± 1.56; all p < 0.05). Severe perfusion defects decreased from 46.2% to 12.3% and extensive perfusion defect areas decreased from 60% to 26.2%. No adverse events, including arrhythmias or elevated cardiac enzyme levels, were reported. Conclusion: Cardiac shock wave therapy is effective in patients with ischemic heart disease and refractory angina, as evidenced by improvements in clinical, functional, and imaging parameters, along with a favourable safety profile.
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.