Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32710365›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2020

Multivessel PCI for Acute Myocardial Infarction: Where Do We Stand After The COMPLETE Trial?

Islam Y Elgendy, Dhruv Mahtta, David Paniagua

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiology reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Islam Y ElgendyDivision of Cardiology, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Doha, Qatar. iyelgendy@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-9853-7591
Dhruv MahttaDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
David PaniaguaDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Baylor College of Medicine · USWeill Cornell Medical College in Qatar · QA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewMultivessel coronary artery disease is frequently encountered in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Several moderate-sized randomized trials have suggested that complete revascularization of non-culprit stenoses in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients without cardiogenic shock is associated with improved outcomes driven solely by a reduction in the risk of future revascularization. RECENT

findingsThe Complete versus Culprit-only Revascularization to Treat Multi-vessel disease after Early PCI for STEMI (COMPLETE) trial recently showed that a complete revascularization strategy for non-culprit stenoses for STEMI patients without cardiogenic shock, performed either during the index hospitalization or after discharge, reduces the risk of cardiac mortality or myocardial infarction (MI) driven by a reduction in the risk of MI at a median of 3 years. In STEMI patients without cardiogenic shock undergoing primary PCI, a complete revascularization strategy for non-culprit stenoses, performed either during the index hospitalization or shortly after discharge, improves outcomes and should be considered as the default strategy whenever feasible.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseMyocardial InfarctionPercutaneous Coronary InterventionST Elevation Myocardial InfarctionHumansTreatment OutcomeMajor adverse cardiac eventsMortalityMyocardial infarctionRevascularization

Identifiers

PMID32710365
OpenAlexW3045001536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.