Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27391212›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

Risk of Stroke in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Optimal Medical Therapy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Nevio Taglieri, Maria Letizia Bacchi Reggiani, Gabriele Ghetti, Francesco Saia, Gianni Dall'Ara, Pamela Gallo, Carolina Moretti, Tullio Palmerini, Cinzia Marrozzini, Antonio Marzocchi and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. CHAScientific reports · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nevio TaglieriIstituto di Cardiologia, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale, Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Maria Letizia Bacchi ReggianiIstituto di Cardiologia, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale, Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Gabriele GhettiIstituto di Cardiologia, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale, Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Francesco SaiaIstituto di Cardiologia, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale, Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Gianni Dall'AraIstituto di Cardiologia, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale, Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Pamela GalloIstituto di Cardiologia, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale, Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Carolina MorettiIstituto di Cardiologia, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale, Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Tullio PalmeriniIstituto di Cardiologia, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale, Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Cinzia MarrozziniIstituto di Cardiologia, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale, Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Antonio MarzocchiIstituto di Cardiologia, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale, Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Claudio RapezziIstituto di Cardiologia, Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale, Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
University of Bologna · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStroke is a rare but serious adverse event associated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the relative risk of stroke between stable patients undergoing a direct PCI strategy and those undergoing an initial optimal medical therapy (OMT) strategy has not been established yet. This study sought to investigate if, in patients with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD), an initial strategy PCI is associated with a higher risk of stroke than a strategy based on OMT alone.

methodsWe performed a meta-analysis of 6 contemporary randomized control trials in which 5673 patients with SCAD were randomized to initial PCI or OMT. Only trials with stent utilization more than 50% were included. Study endpoint was the rate of stroke during follow up.

resultsMean age of patients ranged from 60 to 65 years and stent utilization ranged from 72% to 100%. Rate of stroke was 2.0% at a weighted mean follow up of 55.3 months. On pooled analysis, the risk of stroke was similar between patients undergoing a PCI plus OMT and those receiving only OMT (2.2% vs. 1.8%, OR on fixed effect = 1.24 95%CI: 0.85-1.79). There was no heterogeneity among the studies (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.15). On sensitivity analysis after removing each individual study the pooled effect estimate remains unchanged.

conclusionsIn patients with SCAD an initial strategy based on a direct PCI is not associated with an increased risk of stroke during long-term follow up compared to an initial strategy based on OMT alone.

Indexed as

Percutaneous Coronary InterventionAgedCoronary Artery DiseaseFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk FactorsStroke

Identifiers

PMID27391212
PMCPMC4938490
OpenAlexW2472489501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.