Trial reportJournal of the American Heart Association2021
Importance of Risk Assessment in Timing of Invasive Coronary Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Non-ST-Segment-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: Insights From the VERDICT Trial.
Trial report in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence detection of heart failure on coronary computed tomography angiography: external validation in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Comparison of Troponin in a Prehospital Blood Sample and Risk Scores.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A large-scale 12-lead electrocardiogram dataset for acute coronary syndrome prediction containing 19,955 ECGs.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Frailty in acute coronary syndrome: From risk stratification to clinical decision-making.World journal of cardiology · 2026Review
- Early Invasive Strategy in Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome With Congestive Heart Failure - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Circulation reports · 2025Article
- What US Cardiology Can Learn From the 2023 ESC Guidelines for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes.Clinical cardiology · 2024Article
- GRACE scores or high-sensitivity troponin for timing of coronary angiography in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2024Article
- Very early vs delayed invasive strategy in high-risk NSTEMI patients without hemodynamic instability: Insight from the KAMIR-NIH.PloS one · 2024Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting significant coronary artery stenosis in suspected non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary artery syndrome with low-to-intermediate risk stratification.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Non-ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: When Is Rapid Revascularization Critical?Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The optimal timing of invasive examination and treatment of high-risk patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome has not been established. We investigated the efficacy of early invasive coronary angiography compared with standard-care invasive coronary angiography on the risk of all-cause mortality according to the GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) risk score in a predefined subgroup analysis of the VERDICT (Very Early Versus Deferred Invasive Evaluation Using Computerized Tomography) trial. Methods and Results Patients with clinical suspicion of non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome with ECG changes indicating new ischemia and/or elevated troponin, in whom invasive coronary angiography was clinically indicated and deemed logistically feasible within 12 hours, were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomized 1:1 to an early (≤12 hours) or standard (48-72 hours) invasive strategy. The primary outcome of the present study was all-cause mortality. Of 2147 patients randomized in the VERDICT trial, 2092 patients had an available GRACE risk score. Of these, 1021 (48.8%) patients had a GRACE score >140. During a median follow-up of 4.1 years, 192 (18.8%) and 54 (5.0%) patients died in the high and low GRACE score groups, respectively. The risk of death with the early invasive strategy was increased in patients with a GRACE score ≤140 (hazard ratio [HR], 2.04 [95% CI, 1.16-3.59]), whereas there was a trend toward a decreased risk of death with the early invasive strategy in patients with a GRACE score >140 (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.63-1.10]) (
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.