MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reperfusion Times for Radial Versus Femoral Access in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

2015· article· en· W2547533398 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Warren J. Cantor, Dennis T. Ko, Madhu K. Natarajan, Vladimír Džavík, Harindra C. Wijeysundera, Julie T. Wang, Kori Kingsbury, James L. Velianou, Eric A. Cohen, Michel R. Le May, Jack V. Tu

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Interventions · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Procedures and Complications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSouthlake Regional Health CenterHamilton Health SciencesUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OttawaOntario Stroke NetworkSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneous coronary interventionMyocardial infarctionCardiogenic shockCardiologyInternal medicineCardiac catheterizationPropensity score matchingRadial arteryPercutaneousBalloonFemoral arteryDoor-to-balloonSurgeryArteryPrimary angioplasty

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Radial access is associated with less bleeding and vascular complications. However, it may delay reperfusion during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. METHODS AND RESULTS: A provincial database prospectively collected clinical and procedural characteristics for all urgent percutaneous coronary intervention procedures performed between June 2010 and September 2011 in Ontario for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, including time of arrival in the catheterization laboratory and time of first balloon inflation. After excluding patients with cardiogenic shock, with previous bypass surgery, or who received fibrinolysis, 2947 patients were included in the analysis. Propensity score matching was used to minimize difference in clinical characteristics between radial and femoral access procedures. Predictors of radial access included younger age and male sex. After propensity score matching, the median time from arrival in the cardiac catheterization laboratory to first balloon was 27 minutes (25th%-75th%, 21-34) for the femoral group and 30 minutes (25th%-75th %, 24-39) for the radial group (P<0.001). When hospitals were stratified based on the proportion of primary percutaneous coronary intervention cases that were performed using radial access, there was no difference in treatment times between radial and femoral access in the tercile of hospitals that used radial access most frequently. There were no significant differences in the rates of death or myocardial infarction at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: This contemporary multicenter registry demonstrates that the time to first balloon inflation is slightly longer with radial access than with femoral access, although the 3 minute difference is unlikely to be clinically relevant. There is no difference in treatment times at hospitals that frequently use radial access for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Short-term mortality and reinfarction rates are similar with radial and femoral access.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicVascular Procedures and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207