ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2024
Predictors of Revascularization in Patients with Unstable Angina.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic Value of Inflammatory Status in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Single-Center Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Percutaneous coronary interventionEuropean journal of translational myology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe factors that determine the necessity of coronary artery revascularization in patients with unstable angina (UA) have been supported by limited data. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the predictors of revascularization in patients with UA.
methodsThe study included the recorded data of 3668 patients with UA who underwent cardiac catheterization (age 66 ± 9.2, men 70%); 2615 of them (71%) underwent revascularization (percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), or hybrid revascularization. The remaining 1053 patients (29%) had no significant coronary stenosis and were regarded as controls. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to separate the predictors of revascularization.
resultsIt was found that severe angina (OR 2.7, 95%CI 1.9-3.7), male gender (OR 1.4, 95%CI 1.1-1.7), and hyperlipidemia were the predictors of revascularization. It was also noted that intraventricular conduction disorders including left and right bundle branch blocks and a history of previous revascularization and myocardial infarction were associated with lower odds of revascularization.
conclusionOverall, however, the predictive value of the studied factors proved to be poor and may still point to the multifactorial nature of significant coronary artery stenosis and the need for revascularization in patients with UA.
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.