Late Intervention on an Occluded Infarct-Related Artery: A Meta-analysis of the Randomized Controlled Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context Late intervention to open an occluded infarct-related artery (IRA) after initial acute myocardial infarction was postulated to lead to clinical benefit. Objective To conduct a meta-analysis of the randomized trials. Study Selection Eligibility criteria were: 1) randomized trials comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a totally occluded artery (TIMI flow 0-1) versus medical therapy, 2) in stable post myocardial infarction (MI) patients without spontaneous or low level exercise induced ischemia, 3) trials with a time from the onset of symptoms to randomization >24 hours, but <6 weeks, and 4) trials reporting mortality and recurrent MI as an endpoint. Of 961 citations reviewed, 3 disagreements were easily resolved by discussion and 6 trials were selected for inclusion. Data Synthesis The primary endpoint was the composite of recurrent MI or death. The secondary endpoints were the development of heart failure or recurrent myocardial infarction. In a meta-analysis of the 6 trials, which included 2642 patients, late intervention of an IRA had a RR of death or recurrent MI of 1.12 (95% CI 0.91-1.38). Data regarding the development of heart failure was available for 4 trials. In a meta-analysis of these 4 trials, which included 2527 patients, late intervention of an IRA had a RR of 0.79 (95% CI 0.58-1.08). Data regarding the occurrence of recurrent MI was available for 5 trials. In a meta-analysis of these 5 trials, which included 2598 patients, late intervention of an IRA had a RR of 1.28 (95% CI 0.91-1.79). Conclusions Our meta-analysis of the currently available randomized data addressing late intervention of an occluded IRA failed to reveal clinical benefit with regard to the clinical endpoints of death, heart failure or reinfarction. The trend towards an increase in reinfarction among the PCI treated patients suggested by the Open Artery Trial (OAT) investigators persisted, but did not achieve statistical significance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.115 | 0.101 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.023 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".