ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
One-Year Follow-Up of Patients Admitted for Emergency Coronary Angiography after Resuscitated Cardiac Arrest.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: Despite the improvement of the in-hospital survival rate after aborted sudden cardiac death (SCD), cerebral anoxia may have severe neurologic consequences and may impair long-term outcome and quality of life of surviving patients. The aim of this study was to assess neurological outcomes at one year after resuscitated cardiac arrest; (2) Methods: This prospective, observational, and multicentre study included patients >18 yo admitted in the catheterisation laboratory for coronary angiography after aborted SCD between 1 May 2018 and 31 May 2020. Only patients who were discharged alive from hospital were evaluated. The primary endpoint was survival without neurological sequelae at one-year follow-up defined by a cerebral performance category (CPC) of one or two. Secondary end points included all-cause mortality, New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, neurologic evaluation at discharge, three-month and one-year follow-up using the CPC scale, and quality of life at 1 year using the Quality of Life after Brain Injury (QOLIBRI) questionnaire; (3) Results: Among 143 patients admitted for SCD within the study period, 61 (42.7%) were discharged alive from hospital, among whom 55 (90.1%) completed the one-year follow-up. No flow and low flow times were 1.9 ± 2.4 min and 16.5 ± 10.4 min, respectively. For 93.4% of the surviving patients, an initial shockable rhythm (n = 57) was observed and acute coronary syndrome was diagnosed in 75.4% of them (n = 46). At 1 year, survival rate without neurologic sequelae was 87.2% (n = 48). Patients with poor outcome were older (69.3 vs. 57.4 yo; p = 0.04) and had lower body mass index (22.4 vs. 26.7; p = 0.013) and a lower initial Left Ventricle Ejection Fraction (LVEF) (32.1% vs. 40.3%; p = 0.046). During follow-up, neurological status improved in 36.8% of patients presenting sequelae at discharge, and overall quality of life was satisfying for 66.7% of patients according to the QOLIBRI questionnaire; (4) Conclusions: Among patients admitted to the catheterisation laboratory for aborted SCD, mainly related to Acute Coronary Syndrom (ACS), less than a half of them were alive at discharge. However, the one-year survival rate without neurological sequelae was high and overall quality of life was good.
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.