European journal of clinical investigation · 2015
Clinical effect of cardiac shock wave therapy on patients with ischaemic heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Jing, Zhou Chao, Liu Lin, Pan Xizhuo, Guo Tao
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: After several years of study, CSWT has been initially applied to IHD treatment, but the actual effectiveness has never been well evaluated with a meta-analysis.
METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Direct, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register database and Chinese database were searched. The randomized controlled trials, and single-arm and cohort study related to in patients with IHD undergoing CSWT were included and 14 articles were finally analysed. The data related to the study design, patient characteristics and outcomes were extracted. All the selected data were calculated with random-effects models in weighted mean differences, and heterogeneity was carefully evaluated as well.
RESULTS: (i) Cardiac shock wave therapy improves the angina pectoris symptom (including the decrease of Canadian Cardiovascular Society class [-0·86 (-1·12, -0·65), P < 0·00001], nitroglycerin dosage (times/weeks) [-0·71 (-1·08, -0·33), P = 0·0002] and a increase of Seattle Angina Questionnaire score [5·64 (3·12, 8·15), P < 0·0001)]); (ii) CSWT leads to a reduce in heart failure (including a reduction of New York Heart Association functional class [-0·49 (-0·62, -0·37), P < 0·00001], a stable rise in 6-min walking distance [68·38 (39·70, 97·05), P < 0·00001] and a growth in left ventricular ejection fraction with echocardiography screening [6·73 (4·67,8·80), P < 0·00001]); (iii) CSWT improves myocardial viability within improving in total score of perfusion imaging [-5·19 (-8·08, -2·30), P = 0·0004] and total score of metabolism imaging [-5·33 (-7·77, -2·90), P < 0·0001].
CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis suggests that CSWT may offer beneficial effects to patients with IHD, although there was significant heterogeneity across the studies.
METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Direct, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register database and Chinese database were searched. The randomized controlled trials, and single-arm and cohort study related to in patients with IHD undergoing CSWT were included and 14 articles were finally analysed. The data related to the study design, patient characteristics and outcomes were extracted. All the selected data were calculated with random-effects models in weighted mean differences, and heterogeneity was carefully evaluated as well.
RESULTS: (i) Cardiac shock wave therapy improves the angina pectoris symptom (including the decrease of Canadian Cardiovascular Society class [-0·86 (-1·12, -0·65), P < 0·00001], nitroglycerin dosage (times/weeks) [-0·71 (-1·08, -0·33), P = 0·0002] and a increase of Seattle Angina Questionnaire score [5·64 (3·12, 8·15), P < 0·0001)]); (ii) CSWT leads to a reduce in heart failure (including a reduction of New York Heart Association functional class [-0·49 (-0·62, -0·37), P < 0·00001], a stable rise in 6-min walking distance [68·38 (39·70, 97·05), P < 0·00001] and a growth in left ventricular ejection fraction with echocardiography screening [6·73 (4·67,8·80), P < 0·00001]); (iii) CSWT improves myocardial viability within improving in total score of perfusion imaging [-5·19 (-8·08, -2·30), P = 0·0004] and total score of metabolism imaging [-5·33 (-7·77, -2·90), P < 0·0001].
CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis suggests that CSWT may offer beneficial effects to patients with IHD, although there was significant heterogeneity across the studies.