Evidence Hub

Abstract 17136: Prospective Cohort Study for Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Mobile, Motorized Enhanced Extracorporeal Counterpulsation in Refractory Angina Patients

Jooyeon Lee, Jaewon Oh, In-Cheol Kim, Seonhwa Lee, Se-Eun Kim, C. J. Lee, Hyungseop Kim, Seok-Min Kang

Circulation, 2023

71 participants

Abstract

Introduction:

Enhanced external counterpulsation (EECP) therapy is a potential treatment for refractory angina, which refers to persistent symptoms despite optimal treatment. However, the immobility, cost, and lack of individualized pressure control limit the accessibility and clinical implications of EECP. To address these limitations, a new Mobile, Motorized Enhanced Counterpulsation (MECP) device has been developed.

Hypothesis:

To investigate efficacy of MECP in improving in angina functional class and exercise tolerance in patients with refractory angina and to validate the consistency in outcomes observed with conventional EECP treatment.

Methods:

This prospective study enrolled patients with symptomatic refractory angina between September 2020 and December 2022 at two tertiary centers in Korea. Baseline and post-treatment assessments included measurements of angina scale, 6-minute walking test, cardiopulmonary exercise test, and central arterial pressure.

Results:

The study included 71 patients (70.4% male, median age 66 years). After the 10-hour MECP treatment session, 57.7% of patients showed improvement in angina scale based on Canadian Cardiovascular Society classification, with a significant distribution change from 76.8% to 49.3% in class II and from 21.7% to 5.7% in class III (p<0.001). Furthermore, patients demonstrated an increase of 20 meters in the 6-minute walk distance after MECP treatment (464 meters vs. 484 meters, p<0.001). However, there were no…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 71 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free