For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
24
views
6
references
 Top references
cited by
10
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      825
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Cost-Effectiveness of Spinal Cord Stimulation versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients with Severe Angina Pectoris – Long-Term Results from the ESBY Study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The present study is a 2-year follow-up of the 104 patients participating in the ESBY study (Electrical Stimulation versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in Severe Angina Pectoris), a randomised prospective study including patients with increased surgical risk and no prognostic benefit from revascularisation. Hospital care costs, morbidity and causes of death after spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were assessed, as well as the complication rate of SCS treatment. SCS proved to be a less expensive symptomatic treatment modality of angina pectoris than CABG (p < 0.01). The SCS group had fewer hospitalisation days related to the primary intervention (p < 0.0001) and fewer hospitalisation days due to cardiac events (p < 0.05). The groups did not differ with regard to causes of death. There were no serious complications related to the SCS treatment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references6

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Physiology of spinal cord stimulation: review and update.

          Mark Foreman, B Linderoth (1999)
          Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) was an outgrowth of the well-known gate control theory presented by Melzack and Wall in 1965. Although the method has been used to treat chronic severe pain for more than three decades, very little was known about the physiological and biochemical mechanisms behind the beneficial effects until recently. We now know that SCS activates several different mechanisms to treat different types of pain such as neuropathic and ischemic. In general, these mechanisms seem most dependent on activation of only a few segments of the spinal cord. However, both animal studies and human observations have indicated that supraspinal circuits may contribute as well. In the treatment of neuropathic pain, intermittent SCS may give several hours of pain relief after cessation of the stimulation. This protracted effect indicates long-lasting modulation of neural activity involving changes in the local transmitter systems in the dorsal horns. In ischemic pain, animal experiments demonstrate that inhibition of afferent activity in the spinothalamic tracts, long-term suppression of sympathetic activity, and antidromic effects on peripheral reflex circuits may take part in the pain alleviation. Moderate SCS intensities seem to evoke sympathetic inhibition, but higher stimulation intensities may induce antidromically mediated release of vasoactive substances, eg, the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), resulting in peripheral vasodilation. The anti-ischemic effect of SCS in angina pectoris due to intermittent coronary ischemia probably occurs because application of SCS appears to result in a redistribution of cardiac blood supply, as well as a decrease in tissue oxygen demand. Recent studies indicate that SCS modulates the activity of cardiac intrinsic neurons thereby restricting the arrythmogenic consequences of intermittent local coronary ischemia. The present state of knowledge is briefly reviewed and recent research directions outlined.
          Article 0 comments Cited 58 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Dorsal column stimulation for pain relief from intractable angina pectoris.

            Sarah K. Giles, D. Murphy (1987)
            Dorsal column stimulation was undertaken in 10 patients referred to the Pain Relief Clinic for management of otherwise intractable angina pectoris. All patients were on maximal medical therapy and were determined to be unsuitable for coronary artery revascularization by the referring cardiologists. Dorsal column stimulation was beneficial in all patients by decreasing the frequency and severity of anginal attacks. The mechanism of action of dorsal column stimulation in this condition is uncertain.
            Article 0 comments Cited 16 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Long-term results of RITA-1 trial: clinical and cost comparisons of coronary angioplasty and coronary-artery bypass grafting

              John R Hampton, Martin J. Buxton, Kiran Nanchahal … (1998)
              Article 0 comments Cited 15 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (publisher-id): CRD
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Cardiology
                Journal ID (doi): 10.1159/issn.0008-6312
                Title: Cardiology
                Publisher: S. Karger AG
                ISSN (Print): 0008-6312
                ISSN (Electronic): 1421-9751
                Publication date Subscription-year: 2003
                Publication date (Print): February 2003
                Publication date (Electronic): 24 February 2003
                Volume: 99
                Issue: 1
                Pages: 20-24
                Affiliations
                aMultidisciplinary Pain Centre, Sahlgrenska University Hospital/Östra, bInstitute of Clinical Neuroscience, Stroke Research Unit, cCardiovascular Centre, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden
                Article
                Publisher ID: 68447 Other ID: Cardiology 2003;99:20–24
                DOI: 10.1159/000068447
                PubMed ID: 12589118
                SO-VID: 593a2caa-0a0f-49e0-afe2-cf89987862ff
                Copyright © © 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel
                License:

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                Date received : 28 August 2002
                Date accepted : 22 October 2002
                Page count
                Tables: 4, References: 27, Pages: 5
                Categories
                Subject: General Cardiology

                ScienceOpen disciplines: General medicine,Neurology,Cardiovascular Medicine,Internal medicine,Nephrology
                Keywords: Bypass,Angina,Cost-effectiveness,Electrical stimulation
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: General medicine, Neurology, Cardiovascular Medicine, Internal medicine, Nephrology
                Keywords: Bypass, Angina, Cost-effectiveness, Electrical stimulation

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content825

                See all similar

                Cited by9

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors50

                See all reference authors