Clinical Efficacy of Permanent Internal Mammary Artery Occlusion in Chronic Coronary Syndrome: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trial
The Clinical Efficacy of Permanent Internal Mammary Artery Occlusion in Chronic Coronary Syndrome (CLIMACCS) trial, a randomized, sham-controlled trial, tested the clinical efficacy of permanent internal mammary artery (IMA) device occlusion on symptoms in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CC...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The American journal of cardiology 2024-08, Vol.225, p.160-170 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The Clinical Efficacy of Permanent Internal Mammary Artery Occlusion in Chronic Coronary Syndrome (CLIMACCS) trial, a randomized, sham-controlled trial, tested the clinical efficacy of permanent internal mammary artery (IMA) device occlusion on symptoms in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS), coronary artery occlusive blood supply, and myocardial ischemia. This was a prospective trial in 101 patients with CCS randomly allocated (1:1) to IMA device occlusion (verum group) or to IMA sham intervention (placebo group). The primary study end point was the change in treadmill exercise time (ET) (ΔET in seconds) at 6 weeks after trial intervention. Secondary study end points were the changes in collateral flow index (CFI) and angina pectoris during a simultaneous 1-minute proximal balloon occlusion of a coronary artery. CFI is the ratio between simultaneous mean coronary occlusive, divided by mean aortic pressure, both subtracted by central venous pressure. In the verum and placebo groups, the ET changed from 398 ± 176 seconds to 421 ± 198s in the verum group (p = 0.1745) and from 426 ± 162 seconds to 430 ± 166 seconds in the placebo group (p = 0.55); ΔET amounted to +23 ± 116s and +4 ± 120 seconds, respectively (p = 0.44). CFI change during follow-up equaled +0.022 ± 0.061 in the verum and −0.039 ± 0.072 in the placebo group (p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0002-9149 1879-1913 1879-1913 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.amjcard.2024.06.030 |