ArticleCaspian journal of internal medicine2026
Clinical efficacy and mechanism of action of cardiac rehabilitation after revascularization for multi-vessel coronary artery disease.
Article in Caspian journal of internal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical and Genetic Factors Associated with Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: A Cross-Sectional Study of CYP2C19 Polymorphisms and Metabolic Comorbidities.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Analyzing the clinical efficacy and mechanism of action of cardiac rehabilitation after revascularization for coronary multibranch lesions. Methods: 150 patients with multiple coronary artery lesions were selected for the study from July 2022 to March 2023, and were randomly divided into observation group (75 cases, complete revascularization + cardiac rehabilitation intervention) and control group (75 cases, complete revascularization). The level of patients' 6 min walking experiment, quality of life, cardiac function indexes, and laboratory indexes were analyzed. Results: The level of 6-min walking test was significantly higher in the observation group than in the control group (p<0.05); the quality of life of patients in the observation group was significantly higher than that of the control group (p<0.05); the levels of left ventricular end-systolic internal diameter (LVESD), left ventricular end-diastolic internal diameter (LVEDD), left ventricular pressure (LVP), and interventricular septal thickness (LVS) in patients in the observation group were significantly lower than that of the control group; and the level of LV ejection fraction (LVEFA) levels were significantly higher than those of the control group (P=0.00); serum homocysteine (Hcy) and blood uric acid (SUA) levels of patients in the observation group were significantly lower than those of the control group (P=0.00). Conclusion: Complete revascularization + cardiac rehabilitation intervention can effectively improve patients' 6-min walking test level, improve patients' cardiac function indexes, improve patients' quality of life, improve patients' laboratory index levels, and play a significant role in improving patients' prognosis, which is worthy of widespread promotion.
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.