Na Jia1,2, Ruisheng Zhang1, Baoyi Liu1, Bing Liu1, Xin Qi1, Ming Lan1, Junmeng Liu1, Ping Zeng3, Congxia Chen4, Wenchan Li4, Yue Guo4, Zhiming Yao4, Qing He5,6. 1. Department of Cardiology, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatrics Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, 1 Dahua Road, Dongdan, Dongcheng, Beijing, 100730, People's Republic of China. 2. Graduate School of Peking, Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China. 3. Department of Epidemiology, The Key Laboratory of Geriatrics, Beijing Institute of Geriatrics, National Center of Gerontology, National Health Commission, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People's Republic of China. 4. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatrics, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People's Republic of China. 5. Department of Cardiology, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatrics Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, 1 Dahua Road, Dongdan, Dongcheng, Beijing, 100730, People's Republic of China. heqingli2001@126.com. 6. Graduate School of Peking, Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China. heqingli2001@126.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies proved the efficacy of cardiac shock wave therapy (CSWT) for coronary artery disease (CAD) patients who are not candidate for reperfusion therapy. Randomized control trials are limited. We try to explore the efficacy and safety of CSWT for patients with severe CAD. METHODS: Thirty patients with severe CAD who had obvious ischemia on myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) were enrolled and randomly assigned to the CSWT group or the control group. They had received optimal medication treatment for at least three months. Nine sessions of shock wave therapy were conducted over 3 months. CSWT group received the real treatment, while the control group received the pseudo-treatment. Clinical symptom, imaging outcomes and safety parameters were compared between two groups. RESULTS: After treatment, regional stress score (P = .023), improvement rate (IR) of ischemic area (IA) stress (P < .001) and IR of IA difference (P < .001) were significantly favor CSWT group. The interaction of summed rest score (P < .001), summed stress score (P = .004), summed difference score (P = .036) were significantly improved in the CSWT group compared to the control group. Seattle angina questionnaire, quality of life (QOL) and the distance of six-minute walking test (6MWT) were improved in both groups without significant difference between them. Hemodynamic parameters were stable during procedure. Myocardial injury markers showed no changes in two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated CSWT could effectively and safely improve myocardial perfusion in patients with severe CAD. Clinical symptom, QOL and 6MWT were all improved after treatment, but no significant difference between two groups.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies proved the efficacy of cardiac shock wave therapy (CSWT) for coronary artery disease (CAD) patients who are not candidate for reperfusion therapy. Randomized control trials are limited. We try to explore the efficacy and safety of CSWT for patients with severe CAD. METHODS: Thirty patients with severe CAD who had obvious ischemia on myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) were enrolled and randomly assigned to the CSWT group or the control group. They had received optimal medication treatment for at least three months. Nine sessions of shock wave therapy were conducted over 3 months. CSWT group received the real treatment, while the control group received the pseudo-treatment. Clinical symptom, imaging outcomes and safety parameters were compared between two groups. RESULTS: After treatment, regional stress score (P = .023), improvement rate (IR) of ischemic area (IA) stress (P < .001) and IR of IA difference (P < .001) were significantly favor CSWT group. The interaction of summed rest score (P < .001), summed stress score (P = .004), summed difference score (P = .036) were significantly improved in the CSWT group compared to the control group. Seattle angina questionnaire, quality of life (QOL) and the distance of six-minute walking test (6MWT) were improved in both groups without significant difference between them. Hemodynamic parameters were stable during procedure. Myocardial injury markers showed no changes in two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated CSWT could effectively and safely improve myocardial perfusion in patients with severe CAD. Clinical symptom, QOL and 6MWT were all improved after treatment, but no significant difference between two groups.
Authors: Ahmed A Khattab; Broder Brodersen; Daniela Schuermann-Kuchenbrandt; Hans Beurich; Ralph Tölg; Volker Geist; Torsten Schäfer; Gert Richardt Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2006-11-09 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Birgit Assmus; Dirk H Walter; Florian H Seeger; David M Leistner; Julia Steiner; Ina Ziegler; Andreas Lutz; Walaa Khaled; Jens Klotsche; Torsten Tonn; Stefanie Dimmeler; Andreas M Zeiher Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-04-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: J A Spertus; J A Winder; T A Dewhurst; R A Deyo; J Prodzinski; M McDonell; S D Fihn Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1995-02 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jelena Čelutkienė; Greta Burneikaitė; Evgeny Shkolnik; Gabrielius Jakutis; Donatas Vajauskas; Kamilė Čerlinskaitė; Gitana Zuozienė; Birutė Petrauskienė; Roma Puronaitė; Renata Komiagienė; Irena Butkuvienė; Rima Steponėnienė; Jonas Misiūra; Aleksandras Laucevičius Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound Date: 2019-07-04 Impact factor: 2.062