Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35353329›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2022

Does the ISCHEMIA Trial Apply to My Patients?

Vandan Upadhyaya, Smitha Narayana Gowda, Gustavo Porto, Chirag P Bavishi, Partha Sardar, Riyaz Bashir, Mustafa Emir Gokceer, Saurav Chatterjee

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiology reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Vandan UpadhyayaDivision of Cardiology, Jersey Shore Medical Center, Neptune, NJ, USA.
Smitha Narayana GowdaDivision of Cardiology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
Gustavo PortoFrank H Netter School of Medicine, Quinnipiac University, Hamden, CT, USA.
Chirag P BavishiDivision of Cardiology, University of Missouri Columbia, Columbia, MO, USA.
Partha SardarDivision of Cardiology, Ochsner Clinic, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Riyaz BashirDivision of Cardiology, Temple University Hospitals, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Mustafa Emir GokceerDokuz Eylul University Faculty of Medicine.Izmir, Anatolia, Turkey.
Saurav ChatterjeeDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, 270-05 76th Street, New Hyde Park, NY, 11040, USA. sauravchatterjeemd@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-1241-5030

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe ISCHEMIA trial demonstrated no difference in myocardial infarction or death in patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or large ischemia territory treated either with invasive revascularization or optimal medical therapy. Whether the findings of the randomized control trial relates to real-world outcomes is uncertain. RECENT

findingsContemporary guideline-directed medical therapy has had a significant impact on the prognosis of coronary artery disease. Various observational data appear to indicate limited generalizability of the ISCHEMIA trial in different populations. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the optimal modality of therapy in patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia. The applicability of ISCHEMIA and ISCHEMIA-CKD trials still requires further validation.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseMyocardial IschemiaHumansMyocardial InfarctionPrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAntianginalChest painCoronary diseaseIschemic heart diseaseRevascularization

Identifiers

PMID35353329

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.