Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36284033›Full record

Trial reportJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2023

Ischemia-guided vs routine non-culprit vessel angioplasty for patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction and multi-vessel disease: the IAEA SPECT STEMI trial.

Ganesan Karthikeyan, Amalia Peix, Niveditha Devasenapathy, Amelia Jimenez-Heffernan, Saif-Ul Haque, Carlo Rodella, Raffaele Giubbini, Erick Alexanderson Rosas, Elgin Ozkan, Yung Jih Felix Keng and 14 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readEquivalence TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Revascularization of non-culprit lesions: A common dilemma.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

24 authors at 15 institutions in 12 countries.

Ganesan KarthikeyanDepartment of Cardiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India. karthik2010@gmail.com.
Amalia PeixDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery Institute, Havana, Cuba.
Niveditha DevasenapathyThe George Institute for Global Health, New Delhi, India.
Amelia Jimenez-HeffernanHospital Universitario Juan Ramón Jiménez, Huelva, Spain.
Saif-Ul HaqueNuclear Medicine, Oncology and Radiotherapy Institute (NORI), Islamabad, Pakistan.
Carlo RodellaHealth Physics Department, ASST-Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy.
Raffaele GiubbiniNuclear Medicine, University of Brescia and Spedali Civili Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
Erick Alexanderson RosasNational Institute of Cardiology Ignacio Chavez, Mexico City, Mexico.
Elgin OzkanDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Medical School, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
Yung Jih Felix KengDepartment of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
João VitolaQuanta Diagnóstico por Imagem, Curitiba, Brazil.
Dragana Sobic-SaranovicFaculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
Manoj SoniThe George Institute for Global Health, New Delhi, India.
Leonardo LópezDepartment of Interventional Cardiology, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery Institute, Havana, Cuba.
Lázaro O CabreraDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery Institute, Havana, Cuba.
Santiago Camacho-FreireHospital Universitario Juan Ramón Jiménez, Huelva, Spain.
Ana Manovel-SanchezHospital Universitario Juan Ramón Jiménez, Huelva, Spain.
Hesham NaeemRawalpindi Institute of Cardiology, Rawalpindi, Pakistan.
Shazia FatimaNuclear Medicine, Oncology and Radiotherapy Institute (NORI), Islamabad, Pakistan.
Roberto RinaldiHealth Physics Department, ASST-Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy.
Isabel Carvajal-JuarezNational Institute of Cardiology Ignacio Chavez, Mexico City, Mexico.
Kerim EsenbogaDepartment of Cardiology, Medical School Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
Maurizio DondiNuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging Section, Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria.
Diana PaezNuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging Section, Division of Human Health, Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria.
Hospital Juan Ramón Jiménez · ESInstituto de Cardiología y Cirugía Cardiovascular · CUAnkara University · TRAzienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale degli Spedali Civili di Brescia · ITGeorge Institute for Global Health · INInternational Atomic Energy Agency · ATKarachi Institute of Radiotherapy and Nuclear Medicine · PKAll India Institute of Medical Sciences · INCentrus Diagnósticos por Imagem · BRInstituto Nacional de Cardiología · MXNational Heart Centre Singapore · SGRawalpindi Medical University · PKUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de México · MXUniversity of Belgrade · RSUniversity of Brescia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn patients with multi-vessel disease presenting with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the efficacy and safety of ischemia-guided, vs routine non-culprit vessel angioplasty has not been adequately studied.

methodsWe conducted an international, randomized, non-inferiority trial comparing ischemia-guided non-culprit vessel angioplasty to routine non-culprit vessel angioplasty, following primary PCI for STEMI. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in percent ischemic myocardium at follow-up stress MPI. All MPI images were processed and analyzed at a central core lab, blinded to treatment allocation.

resultsIn all, 109 patients were enrolled from nine countries. In the ischemia-guided arm, 25/48 (47%) patients underwent non-culprit vessel PCI following stress MPI. In the routine non-culprit PCI arm, 43/56 (77%) patients underwent angioplasty (86% within 6 weeks of randomization). The median percentage of ischemic myocardium on follow-up imaging (mean 16.5 months) was low, and identical (2.9%) in both arms (difference 0.13%, 95%CI - 1.3%-1.6%, P < .0001; non-inferiority margin 5%).

conclusionA strategy of ischemia-guided non-culprit PCI resulted in low ischemia burden, and was non-inferior to a strategy of routine non-culprit vessel PCI in reducing ischemia burden. Selective non-culprit PCI following STEMI offers the potential for cost-savings, and may be particularly relevant to low-resource settings. (CTRI/2018/08/015384).

Indexed as

Percutaneous Coronary InterventionST Elevation Myocardial InfarctionAngioplastyHumansTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-PhotonTreatment OutcomeMPIMyocardial ischemia and infarctionSPECT

Identifiers

PMID36284033
PMCPMC9595582
OpenAlexW4307400442

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.