SynthesisClinical cardiology2025
Clinical Outcomes of Immediate Versus Staged Revascularization of Nonculprit Arteries in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical cardiology, 2025. 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.
- Integrated Polymeric Sensors in Heart and Blood Vessel Monitoring: A Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Smart Thrombosis Care: The Rise of Closed-Loop Diagnosis-to-Treatment Nano Systems.International journal of nanomedicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecent guidelines for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) recommend revascularization of non-culprit lesions following primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the optimal timing for this procedure-whether immediate or staged-remains uncertain.
methodsA comprehensive search using PubMed (MEDLINE), Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar was conducted to identify studies comparing clinical outcomes between immediate and staged revascularization approaches in patients with MVD undergoing PCI. A random effects model was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary outcome was 1-year all-cause mortality.
resultsA total of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comprising 3886 patients (1964 in the immediate revascularization group and 1940 in the staged revascularization group), with a median follow-up of 12 months, were included in the analysis. No significant difference in the risk of 1-year mortality was noted between the two approaches. The risk of target vessel revascularization (TVR) at 1-year follow-up was significantly lower in the immediate revascularization group compared to the staged revascularization group (RR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.47-0.86; I²: 0%; p = 0.03). Additionally, the immediate revascularization group had a significantly lower risk of myocardial infarction (MI) at 1-year follow-up than the staged approach (RR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.37-0.88; I²: 10%; p = 0.01).
conclusionThis meta-analysis suggests that immediate revascularization is associated with a significantly lower risk of TVR and MI at 1-year compared to staged revascularization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.