SynthesisHerz2019
Delayed vs. immediate stenting in STEMI with a high thrombus burden : A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Herz, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identification and Management Strategies for Intracoronary High Thrombus Burden in Patients With STEMI: A Practical Experience and Literature Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Evaluating the Impact and Financial Implications of Immediate versus Delayed Stenting Strategies in High Thrombus Burden Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe results of several large-scale randomized controlled trials are controversial regarding the advantages of delayed stenting (DS) compared with immediate stenting (IS). We sought to determine whether DS has benefits for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with a high thrombus burden compared with IS.
methodsWe systematically searched four electronic databases. Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) grade 3 flow, TIMI myocardial blush grade (TMBG), complete ST-segment resolution (>70%), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and major bleeding complications were studied as outcomes. Data analysis was performed using a random-effects model utilizing the Review Manager 5.3 software.
resultsOur meta-analysis included eight studies involving 744 patients. DS showed greater benefits than IS in terms of TIMI grade 3 flow (odds ratio [OR]: 5.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.98-13.02, p < 0.001), TMBG (OR: 4.17, 95% CI: 1.87-9.31, p < 0.001), complete ST-segment resolution (OR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.36-3.43, p = 0.001), and MACE (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25-0.94, p = 0.03). No significant difference was observed regarding major bleeding events (OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 0.40-7.66, p = 0.45).
conclusionDS yielded satisfactory outcomes regarding myocardial tissue reperfusion, demonstrated by the improved TIMI flow grade, TMBG, complete ST-segment resolution, and decreased MACEs without increasing major bleeding events in patients with STEMI and a high thrombus burden. DS may be preferred to IS for treating patients with this characteristic presentation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.