Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30302100›Full record

ArticlePostepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology2018

Temporal changes in the pattern of invasive angiography use and its outcome in suspected coronary artery disease: implications for patient management and healthcare resources utilization.

Jakub Chmiel, Miłosz K Książek, Weronika Stryszak, Paweł Iwaszczuk, Mateusz K Hołda, Grażyna Świtacz, Artur Kozanecki, Piotr Wilkołek, Paweł Rubiś, Grzegorz Kopeć and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology, 2018. 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
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jakub ChmielDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Miłosz K KsiążekDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Weronika StryszakDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Paweł IwaszczukDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Mateusz K HołdaDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Grażyna ŚwitaczDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Artur KozaneckiDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Piotr WilkołekDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Paweł RubiśDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Grzegorz KopećDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Piotr Odrowąż-PieniążekDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Tadeusz PrzewłockiDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Wiesława TraczDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Piotr PodolecDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
Piotr MusiałekDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Diseases, Jagiellonian University, John Paul II Hospital, Kraków, Poland.
John Paul II Hospital · PLJagiellonian University · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionInvasive coronary angiography (CAG), the 'gold standard' in coronary artery disease (CAD) diagnosis, requires hospitalization, is not risk-free, and engages considerable healthcare resources.

aimTo assess recent (throught out 10 years) evolution of 'significant' (≥ 50% stenosis(es)) CAD prevalence in subjects undergoing CAG for CAD diagnosis in a high-volume tertiary referral center. MATERIAL AND

methodsAnonymized medical records were compared for the last vs. the first 2-years of the decade (June 2007 to May 2018). Referrals for suspected CAD were 2067 of 4522 hospitalizations (45.7%) and 1755 of 5196 (33.8%) respectively (

resultsThe median patient age (64 vs. 68 years) and the prevalence of heart failure (24.1% vs. 42.2%) increased significantly (

conclusionsDespite more advanced age and a higher proportion of subjects with 'any' coronary atherosclerosis on CAG, the likelihood of a 'negative' angiogram (lesion(s) < 50%; no further evaluation/intervention) has increased significantly over the last decade. The exact nature of this phenomenon requires further investigation, particularly as a reverse trend would be expected with the growing role (and current high penetration) of contemporary non-invasive diagnostic tools to rule out significant CAD.

Indexed as

angiographycoronary angiogramcoronary angiographycoronary artery diseasediagnosisinvasive evaluation

Identifiers

PMID30302100
PMCPMC6173087
OpenAlexW2895442971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.