ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2021
Differences in the 2020 ESC Versus 2015 ESC and 2014 ACC/AHA Guidelines on the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting Without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation.
Review in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mandatory First-Aid Training in the Workplace: An Epidemiological Assessment of the Use of Acetylsalicylic Acid Therapy.Epidemiologia (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Risk Stratification in Acute Coronary Syndromes: The Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index as Prognostic Marker.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Practice patterns and percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes: a comparison between Sweden and the US.European heart journal open · 2025Article
- Predictive Value of the Naples Prognostic Score for One-Year Mortality in NSTEMI Patients Undergoing Selective PCI.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Association of d-dimer levels with in-hospital death and multi-vessel coronary artery disease in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Public Awareness and Attitude Regarding the Symptoms of Heart Attacks.Global heart · 2025Article
- Spatio-temporal distribution, prediction and relationship of three major acute cardiovascular events: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, ST-elevation myocardial infarction and stroke.Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
- Genetically modified mesenchymal stromal cells: a cell-based therapy offering more efficient repair after myocardial infarction.Stem cell research & therapy · 2024Review
- Development and validation of a machine learning-based readmission risk prediction model for non-ST elevation myocardial infarction patients after percutaneous coronary intervention.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Nanoparticle Based Cardiac Specific Drug Delivery.Biology · 2023Review
- Gender Disparities in Patients' Decisions about the Management of Myocardial Infarction in East Chinese Province.Emergency medicine international · 2023Article
- The prognostic utility of GRACE risk score in predictive adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with NSTEMI and multivessel disease.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2022Article
- Body Mass Index Is Independently Associated with the Presence of Ischemia in Myocardial Perfusion Imaging.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- The value of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide and hs-CRP in predicting acute kidney injury after acute myocardial infarction.American journal of translational research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewWe assessed the differences in the 2020 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) versus 2015 ESC and 2014 American College of Cardiology (ACC) guidelines on the management of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS). RECENT
findingsThe recent publication of the 2020 ESC has provided a comprehensive series of recommendations on diagnosis and management of patients presenting with NSTE-ACS. However, there are discrepancies between the 2020 ESC versus 2015 ESC and 2014 ACC guidelines, creating uncertainty among clinicians in routine practices. Our investigation provides insights into several domains, including diagnosis, risk stratification, pharmacological treatments, invasive treatment, and special populations. Overall, it seems that the 2020 version of the ESC guideline for the management of NSTE-ACS provides the most evidence-based recommendations for clinicians; although due to the lack of validated investigation across some of the proposed recommendations, further longitudinal multicenter studies are warranted to address the current questions. Diagnostic algorithm in NSTE-ACS. ABBREVIATIONS: ACC = American College of Cardiology; CABG = coronary artery bypass grafting; CCTA = coronary computed tomography angiography; CMR = cardiac magnetic resonance; CS = cardiogenic shock; ECG = electrocardiography; eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate; ESC = European Society of Cardiology; GRACE = Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events; HF = heart failure; LVEF = left ventricular ejection fraction; MPI = myocardial perfusion imaging; MR = mitral regurgitation; NSTE-ACS = non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; TIMI = thrombolysis in myocardial infarction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34671860What 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.