ReviewCardiovascular intervention and therapeutics2023
Complete revascularization in acute myocardial infarction: a clinical review.
Review in Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Incremental Impact of Standard Modifiable Cardiovascular Risk Factors on Long-Term Outcomes After Acute Myocardial Infarction.JACC. Asia · 2026Article
- Standard and Non-standard Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Ischemic Heart Disease and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Clinical Review.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Review
- Advances in Technology and Technique in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Clinical Review.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Review
- Clinical Review of Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction - Revascularization, Mechanical Circulatory Support, and Beyond.Circulation reports · 2025Review
- Impact of early coronary angiography on short-term clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a retrospective study.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Article
- Antithrombotic management in atrial fibrillation patients following percutaneous coronary intervention: A clinical review.Journal of arrhythmia · 2024Review
- Article
- Impact of Cancer, Inflammation, and No Standard Risk Factors in Patients With Myocardial Infarction.JACC. Asia · 2024Article
- Complications and Outcomes of Impella Treatment in Cardiogenic Shock Patients With and Without Acute Myocardial Infarction.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Article
- β-Blocker Therapy After Myocardial Infarction: A Little Goes a Long Way.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In patients with ST segment elevation and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (MI), multivessel (MV) coronary artery disease is found in approximately 50%, leading to worse clinical outcomes. Recent data have suggested that complete revascularization with MV percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with a reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular events as compared to culprit vessel-only revascularization. However, the optimal timing of MV intervention, appropriate non-culprit lesion assessment, and the best revascularization strategy in specific subsets such as cardiogenic shock remain to be established. This review article summarizes current evidence on revascularization strategies in patients with acute MI and MV disease.
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.