Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30684141›Full record

ArticleNetherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation2019

Treatment patterns of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome patients presenting at non-PCI centres in the Netherlands and possible logistical consequences of adopting same-day transfer to PCI centres: a registry-based evaluation.

N P G Hoedemaker, P Damman, H A Bosker, P W Danse, A H Liem, B Geerdes, H van Laarhoven, R J de Winter, NVVC NSTEMI-ACS project group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 2020 ESC Guidelines on acute coronary syndrome without ST-segment elevation : Recommendations and critical appraisal from the Dutch ACS and Interventional Cardiology working groups.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2021
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the Netherlands: room for improvement!Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2020
    Article
  6. NSTEMI treatment: should we always follow the guidelines?Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2019
    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

9 authors.

N P G HoedemakerHeart Center, Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
P DammanRadboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
H A BoskerDepartment of Cardiology, Rijnstate Ziekenhuis, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
P W DanseDepartment of Cardiology, Rijnstate Ziekenhuis, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
A H LiemDepartment of Cardiology, Franciscus Gasthuis & Vlietland, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
B GeerdesAchmea Health Insurance Company, Zeist, The Netherlands.
H van LaarhovenDe Hart&Vaatgroep/Dutch Heart Foundation, The Hague, The Netherlands.
R J de WinterHeart Center, Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. r.j.dewinter@amc.uva.nl.
NVVC NSTEMI-ACS project group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEuropean Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines recommend same-day transfer to a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centre for angiography in high-risk (ESC-HR) patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). We describe the treatment patterns of NSTE-ACS patients presenting at non-PCI centres and evaluate the logistical consequences of adopting same-day transfer.

methodsFrom August 2016 until January 2017, all consecutive NSTE-ACS patients presenting at 23 non-PCI centres in the Netherlands were recorded. We built an online case report form in collaboration with the National Cardiovascular Database Registry to collect information on risk stratification by the attending physician, timing and location of angiography, and treatment.

resultsWe included 871 patients (mean age 69.1 ± 12.8). 55.8% were considered ESC-HR. Overall, angiography at non-PCI centres was 55.1% and revascularisation was 54.1%. Among ESC-HR patients, angiography at non-PCI centres was 51.4% and revascularisation was 54.9%. Angiography <24 h was 55.6% in patients with angiography at a non-PCI centre and 74.3% in patients with angiography at a PCI-centre. Assuming patients would receive similar treatment, adoption of same-day transfer would increase transfers of ESC-HR patients who undergo PCI (44.3%), but also increases transfers of medically treated patients (36.2%) and patients awaiting coronary bypass artery grafting (9.1%).

conclusionsIn this registry of NSTE-ACS patients at non-PCI centres, the majority of ESC-HR patients underwent angiography at a non-PCI centre. Same-day transfer occurred in one-quarter of the ESC-HR patients, despite guideline recommendation. Nonselective adoption of same-day transfer to a PCI centre would increase transfers of ESC-HR patients who undergo PCI, however, equally increases transfers of patients who are medically treated.

Indexed as

coronary angiographyNon-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromePCIsame-day transfer

Identifiers

PMID30684141
PMCPMC6439038

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.