ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2021
Comparison of the Outcomes between Coronary No-Reflow and Slow-Flow Phenomenon in Non-STEMI Patients.
Article in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2021. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical, laboratory, and procedural predictors of slow flow/no reflow phenomenon after emergency percutaneous coronary interventions in ST-elevated myocardial infarction.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
- In Search of the Perfect Coronary Perfusion.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCoronary slow-flow phenomenon (CSFP) and coronary no-reflow phenomenon (CNP) are associated with increased risk of major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE).
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate and compare the one-year clinical follow-up outcomes among patients with CNP and CSFP who underwent percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).
methodsThis study included a total of 858 patients who were diagnosed with NSTEMI and underwent PCI within 24 h of symptom onset. The patients were divided into two groups, the CSFP group (n=221) and the CNP group (n=25), regarding the angiographic characteristics of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow of the infarct-related artery. Patients were followed for one-year. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant.
resultsCNP was observed in 2.91%, and CSFP was observed in 25.75% of the patients. Clinical endpoints analyzed that stroke was significantly higher in the CNP group than in the CSFP group (6 (24%) vs. 6 (2.70%), p<0.001) and MACE was significantly higher in the CNP group than in the CSFP group (11 (44%) vs. 51 (23.10%), p=0.022). Forward conditional logistic regression analysis demonstrated that body mass index (BMI) (OR=1.11, 95%CI: 1.00-1.24, p=0.038) and baseline heart rate (HR) (OR=0.923, 95%CI: 0.88-0.96, p<0.001) were the independent predictors of CNP in NSTEMI.
conclusionCNP patients have worse clinical outcomes and a higher risk of stroke compared with CSFP patients in NSTEMI. (Arq Bras Cardiol. 2021; 116(5):856-864).
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.