ArticleCardiology research2019
Timing of Coronary Angiography After Successful Fibrinolytic Therapy in ST-Segment Elevated Myocardial Infarction.
Article in Cardiology research, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Reply yo the letter to the editor : "Keeping an eye on the pharmacoinvasive strategy"].Archivos peruanos de cardiologia y cirugia cardiovascularArticle
- The assessment of no-reflow phenomenon incidence in early versus delayed percutaneous coronary intervention following a primary fibrinolysis.ARYA atherosclerosisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to compare outcomes of patients received successful fibrinolytic treatment (FT) for ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI) and performed coronary angiography (CAG) within 24 - 72 h or after 72 h.
methodsBetween March 2013 and November 2014, 76 STEMI patients received successful FT and performed CAG > 24 h were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups according to the time-interval from FT admission to CAG performing (Group-1, 24 - 72 h (n = 29), Group-2, > 72 h (n = 47)). The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and heart failure.
resultsThe mean age of patients were 56 ± 11.4 years old (27.6% female). CAG was performed within mean 2.17 ± 0.38 days in the Group-1 and 2.9 ± 11.5 days in the Group 2 (P < 0.001). At short-term follow-up (6 months), MACE rate was higher in Group-2 (21.3%) than Group-1(13.8%), but it was not statistically significant (P = 0.661). The rate of MACE was 37.9% in Group-1 and 38.3% in Group-2 (P = 0.974) in the long-term follow-up (median: 57 months). Overall cardiac mortality rate was 7.9%, the re-infarction rate was 19.7% and heart failure was 17.1% in long-term follow-up, and there were no significant difference between groups.
conclusionsPresent study has shown that performance of CAG after 24 h of successful FT, within 24 - 74 h or > 72 h, did not shown any difference in term of MACE both in short and long-term follow-up.
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.