Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35273439›Full record

ArticleActa Cardiologica Sinica2022

Multivessel versus Culprit-Only Revascularization Strategies in Cardiac Arrest Survivors.

Wei-Ting Chen, Min-Shan Tsai, Chien-Hua Huang, Chih-Wei Sung, Po-Ya Chuang, Chih-Hung Wang, Yen-Wen Wu, Wei-Tien Chang, Wen-Jone Chen

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta Cardiologica Sinica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Wei-Ting ChenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Medical College and Hospital, Taipei.
Min-Shan TsaiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Medical College and Hospital, Taipei.
Chien-Hua HuangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Medical College and Hospital, Taipei.
Chih-Wei SungDepartment of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsinchu.
Po-Ya ChuangSchool of Health Care Administration, Taipei Medical University, Taipei.
Chih-Hung WangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Medical College and Hospital, Taipei.
Yen-Wen WuDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Cardiology Division of Cardiovascular Medical Center, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
Wei-Tien ChangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Medical College and Hospital, Taipei.
Wen-Jone ChenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Medical College and Hospital, Taipei.
Far Eastern Memorial Hospital · TWNational Taiwan University Hospital · TWTaipei Medical University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Whether multivessel revascularization or culprit-only revascularization is more beneficial in cardiac arrest survivors with multivessel coronary artery disease remains unclear. We aimed to retrospectively evaluate whether multivessel or culprit-only revascularization following cardiac arrest was associated with a reduced incidence of in-hospital mortality. Methods: A total of 273 adult nontraumatic cardiac arrest survivors (aged ≥ 18 years) who underwent emergent coronary angiography (CAG) within 24 h following cardiac arrest were retrospectively recruited from three hospitals. Patients without definite coronary artery stenosis (n = 72), one-vessel stenosis (n = 74), or failed percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI; n = 37) were excluded. A total of 90 patients were enrolled for the final analysis and classified into multivessel (revascularization of more than one major vessel during the index CAG; n = 45) and culprit-only (revascularization of the infarct-related artery alone; n = 45) groups. Results: Twenty-five patients (55.6%) in the culprit-only group and 17 patients (37.8%) in the multivessel group failed to survive to discharge [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.24-0.95, p = 0.035]. The benefit of multivessel revascularization on survival was obvious among those with a prolonged cardiopulmonary resuscitation duration (> 10 min) (47.82% vs. 76.92%, adjusted HR = 0.27, 95% CI = 0.08-0.93, p = 0.03). No difference in neurological outcomes (favorable = cerebral performance category scores 1-2; poor = 3-5) between groups was observed (60.0% vs. 55.6%, adjusted OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 0.35-4.26, p = 0.753). Conclusions: Compared with culprit-only revascularization, multivessel revascularization was associated with lower in-hospital mortality among cardiac arrest survivors with multivessel lesions. Owing to the retrospective design and small sample size, the current study should be interpreted as observational and exploratory.

Indexed as

Cardiac arrestCoronary angiographyMultivessel coronary artery diseasePercutaneous coronary interventionSurvival

Identifiers

PMID35273439
PMCPMC8888317
OpenAlexW4220973684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.