ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
Emergent coronary angiography in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2025. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Early coronary angiography (CAG) is a subject of controversy in post-cardiac arrest patients who do not exhibit ST-segment elevation. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect it had on outcomes. Methods: A comprehensive search of Medline and Cochrane yielded 16 studies [of which 9 were observational and 7 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs)] involving 4737 patients. 95% confidence intervals accompanied odds ratios (ORs) were generated by a random-effects model. Meta-regression explored factors modifying effect sizes. Results: Early coronary angiography (CAG) decreased long-term mortality significantly [OR: 0.66 (0.51-0.85)], improved favorable coronary prothrombotic scores [Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 1-2] at discharge [OR: 1.49 (1.09-2.03)], and suggested a trend toward increased percutaneous coronary intervention after CAG [OR: 1.07 (0.75-1.53)]. In contrast to the RCT subgroup, the observational study subgroup exhibited reduced rates of short- and long-term mortality, as well as CPC1-2 at discharge. Meta-regression revealed that type 2 diabetes mellitus and follow-up time influence short-term mortality and CPC 1-2 at discharge, respectively. Conclusion: Observational studies demonstrated that early CAG in post-cardiac arrest patients without ST elevation is associated with long-term clinical benefits. Caveat should be exercised when interpreting.
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.