ArticleScientific reports2022
Effect of different revascularization times on intermediate-risk non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome.
Article in Scientific 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.
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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) is a specific type of acute coronary syndrome. We applied the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score for risk stratification of patient prognosis. There was uncertainty about the routine revascularization time in patients with intermediate-risk NSTE-ACS. A total of 2835 patients with intermediate-risk NSTE-ACS (TIMI score 3-4) included in the China Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry from November 2014 to January 2017 were analyzed according to the time window from symptom onset to revascularization: within 24 h, Group I (814/28.7%); within 24 to 48 h, Group II (526/18.6%); within 48 to 72 h, Group III (403/14.2%); and after 72 h, Group IV (1092/38.5%). Risk factors, management and in-hospital outcomes were analyzed in the four groups. The results of the chi-square test showed that there was a significant difference in the incidence of in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) when revascularization was completed within 48 h than when it was completed after 48 h (P < 0.05). The results of revascularization within 48 h were similar, and the incidence of in-hospital MACEs was lower than when revascularization was completed after 48 h. The incidence of in-hospital MACEs among patients who underwent revascularization within 48 h is lower than that of patients who underwent revascularization after 48 h.
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.