Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28700477›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2017

Application of the SYNTAX score in interventional cardiology: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Pravesh Kumar Bundhun, Yashna Sookharee, Anita Bholee, Feng Huang

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. The current state of the multidisciplinary heart team approach: a systematic review.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

Pravesh Kumar BundhunInstitute of Cardiovascular Diseases, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, Guangxi Tongji Hospital of Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, P.R. China.
Yashna Sookharee
Anita Bholee
Feng Huang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShould the SYNTAX score be integrated in Interventional Cardiology? Should it really be considered as a vital decision-making tool in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)? To confirm the importance of this score, we aimed to systematically compare the postinterventional adverse cardiovascular outcomes which were observed in patients who were allotted a low versus a high SYNTAX score.

methodsRandomized controlled trials and observational studies which were published from January 2007 to January 2017 were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane databases using the searched terms 'SYNTAX score and percutaneous coronary intervention.' Adverse cardiovascular outcomes were considered as the major endpoints. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the statistical parameters, and the main analysis was carried out by the RevMan 5.3 software.

resultsSixteen studies with a total number of 19,751 participants (8589 participants with a low versus 11,162 participants with a high SYNTAX score) were included. Current results showed mortality to be significantly higher with a higher SYNTAX score (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.78-2.46, P = .00001). Cardiac death also significantly favored a low SYNTAX score (RR 2.08, 95% CI 1.66-2.61, P = .00001. Similarly, myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiac events, repeated revascularization, and stent thrombosis were significantly higher following a high SYNTAX score (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.45-2.03, P = .00001; RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.81-2.26, P = .00001; RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.69-2.28, P = .00001; and RR 3.16, 95% CI 2.17-4.59, P = .00001, respectively). Even when patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were separately analyzed, a low SYNTAX score was still significantly associated with lower adverse outcomes.

conclusionsThis analysis is a confirmatory piece of evidence to show that the application of the SYNTAX score in Interventional Cardiology is apparently relevant. The use of this scoring system to grade patients with coronary artery disease and to further guide for revascularization should be encouraged.

Indexed as

Percutaneous Coronary InterventionSeverity of Illness IndexCoronary Artery BypassCoronary Artery DiseaseDecision MakingHumans

Identifiers

PMID28700477
PMCPMC5515749

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.