ArticleEuropean heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology2021
Late primary angioplasty (beyond 12 h): are we sure it should be avoided?
Article in European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Thrombus-Demarcated Stenting with Dual-Contrast Imaging: A Novel Approach for Late-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction with Unsuccessful Predilatation.The International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc · 2025Article
- Late presenters with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and thromboembolic complications: a treatment challenge: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2025Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Outcome of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Yemeni Patients.Heart views : the official journal of the Gulf Heart AssociationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optimal management for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who arrive at a hospital late remains uncertain since evidence and real-world data are limited. Patients who present late with a STEMI are a heterogeneous population, and the clinical decision regarding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) should not be the same for all. One randomized clinical trial, multiple mechanistic studies, and contemporary registries suggest a presumed benefit for a prompt restoration of coronary flow even in late presenting STEMI. Crucial elements in decision-making are the presence of haemodynamic or electrical instability, and ongoing ischaemic signs or symptoms to tip the scales toward PCI. Among clinically stable, late-presenting patients, myocardial viability assessment and functional testing can identify yet another subgroup that may benefit from late PCI.
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.