ArticleThe western journal of emergency medicine2025
Comparison of Pretreatment in European Society of Cardiology Acute Coronary Syndrome Guidelines.
Article in The western journal of emergency medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMost patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) die before hospitalization. Early diagnosis and effective interventions can prevent the disease from worsening. In this single-center, retrospective study we aimed to investigate the appropriateness of the pretreatment of patients referred to the emergency department of our hospital, a percutaneous cardiac intervention (PCI) center, with a prediagnosis of ACS under the previously published European Society of Cardiology guidelines (2017 and 2020) and the new guidelines published in 2023.
methodsBased on the date of publication of the European Society of Cardiology's most recent ACS guidelines (August 25, 2023), we divided patients admitted between August 25, 2022-August 24, 2024, into two groups: patients who were evaluated and received pretreatment under the previous guidelines; and patients who were evaluated and received pretreatment under the new guidelines.
resultsOf 1,675 patients screened for enrollment who were referred to our PCI center with prediagnosis of ACS, after exclusion criteria, we report on 1,450 (86.6%). Pretreatment (before PCI) compliance rate with all aspects of the previous and new guidelines was low, at 9.8%. Study patients were 69.9% (n = 1,013) male with mean age of 63.9 ± 13.0 years. Comparing the compliance rate between the new versus previous guidelines, for individual components, we found better compliance for aspirin administration (72.6 vs. 66.2%) and anticoagulants (40.3 vs. 22.7%), while for P2Y12 inhibitors, we found lower compliance (58.9 vs. 70.0%, all p< .001). For the subset of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, P2Y12 inhibitors were used less appropriately under the new vs. previous guidelines (31.4 vs. 55.0%, p < .001).
conclusionThe compliance rates with the previous and new guidelines for ACS pretreatment by physicians working in hospitals without PCI centers were low. Pretreatment compliance during the new guideline period was lower than compliance during the prior guideline period.
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.