Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36505387›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022

Culprit vessel vs. immediate multivessel vs. out-of-hospital staged intervention for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease.

Chen Wang, Jiachun Lang, Jingxia Zhang, Yuecheng Hu, Chuyi Han, Rongdi Xu, Jikun Wu, Chunwei Liu, Wenyu Li, Tingting Li and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chen WangClinical School of Thoracic, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Jiachun LangClinical School of Thoracic, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Jingxia ZhangDepartment of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Yuecheng HuDepartment of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Chuyi HanClinical School of Thoracic, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Rongdi XuClinical School of Thoracic, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Jikun WuClinical School of Thoracic, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Chunwei LiuDepartment of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Wenyu LiDepartment of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Tingting LiDepartment of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Ao WeiDepartment of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Wei QiDepartment of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Dongxia JinDepartment of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Hongliang CongClinical School of Thoracic, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Le WangDepartment of Cardiology, Tianjin Chest Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Tianjin Chest Hospital · CNTianjin Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and aims: The optimal interventional strategy remains undetermined in hemodynamically stable patients with NSTEMI and MVD. This study aimed to examine clinical prognosis among culprit vessel, immediate multivessel, and staged percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with NSTEMI and MVD. Methods: This retrospective, observational, single-center study included 943 hemodynamically stable patients with NSTEMI and MVD who had undergone successful drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation from January 2014 to December 2019. Patients were categorized into culprit lesion-only PCI (CL-PCI), immediate multivessel PCI (MV-PCI), and out-of-hospital staged MV-PCI according to PCI strategy. The primary outcome was the composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or unplanned repeat revascularization. The secondary outcomes were all-cause death, cardiac death, MI, and unplanned repeat revascularization. Results: Over a median follow-up of 59 months, immediate MV-PCI was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death than CL-PCI (HR: 0.591, 95%CI: 0.364-0.960, Conclusion: Hemodynamically stable patients with NSTEMI and MVD benefited from the strategy of MV-PCI. Patients with complex coronary anatomy treated with out-of-hospital staged MV-PCI rather than immediate MV-PCI had lower risks of MACE. These need to be confirmed in the future randomized study.

Indexed as

multivessel coronary diseasenon-infarct-related arterynon-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarctionpercutaneous coronary interventionstaged intervention

Identifiers

PMID36505387
PMCPMC9726786
OpenAlexW4309702763

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.