ReviewCurrent treatment options in cardiovascular medicine2021
Case Selection During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Who Should Go to the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory?
Review in Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Management Principles for the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory During the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) Pandemic.Interventional cardiology clinics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewTo summarize the best available evidence and recommendations regarding case selection for cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with emphasis on ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) management. RECENT
findingsThe restructuring of cardiovascular services to preserve hospital beds and personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic had a profound effect on healthcare delivery around the world with unintended consequences. In the United States, a significant 38% reduction in CCL activations for STEMI was noted in the early phase of the pandemic. Similarly, a 34% decline in utilization of invasive angiography, an 18% reduction in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), and a 19% increase in door-to-balloon (D2B) times were also observed. These trends coincided with a significant increase in out-of-hospital cardiac arrests and late MI presentations. A shift to pharmacological reperfusion has been advocated in Asia, which resulted in increased morbidity and mortality. SUMMARY: COVID-19 has negatively affected many aspects of STEMI care, including timely access to mechanical reperfusion, which has resulted in increased morbidity and mortality. Balancing optimal STEMI care with the risk of infection to healthcare workers during the pandemic is challenging. Recommendations provided by consensus documents are a helpful guidance.
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.