MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399055789 · doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2024-bcs.74

74 Door-to-balloon times in patients presenting with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina: a retrospective observational study

2024· article· en· W4399055789 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sathana Ingaralingam, Wala Mattar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Systems and Public Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUnstable anginaMyocardial infarctionRetrospective cohort studyPercutaneous coronary interventionInternal medicineCardiologyAngiographyAnginaCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyBalloonTIMICohort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background</h3> National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines suggest that patients with intermediate/high-risk non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or unstable angina (UA) should undergo invasive coronary angiography within 72-hours of presentation to hospital. Timely angiography and possible percutaneous coronary intervention are associated with reduced mortality and cardiovascular morbidity. The aim of this study was to measure door-to-balloon times for patients admitted with NSTEMI/UA, and to determine the proportion of patients who underwent coronary angiography within the 72-hour time target. If the 72-hour time target was exceeded, reasons for delay were explored. <h3>Methods</h3> We performed a retrospective analysis on all patients who underwent an invasive angiogram between July 2022 and December 2022 at Watford General Hospital. Door-to-balloon times were calculated as time of admission, to time of angiography. In patients who had a door-to-balloon time of greater than 72 hours, reasons for delay were explored. Patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and those who suffered a cardiac arrest were excluded from analysis. <h3>Results</h3> One-hundred and fifty-nine patients were included in the final analysis. The mean age of the cohort was 64.5 years. Median time for door-to-balloon was 48.1 hours. The target time of 72-hours was achieved in 73.6% of patients. Forty-two patients underwent an angiogram more than 72-hours after admission. In these patients, 64% were deemed to be medically unstable, 31% were delayed due to lack of available angiogram slots/bed capacity and 5% were deemed to be low-risk ACS. <h3>Conclusion</h3> The door-to-balloon time target of 72-hours has not always been delivered in patients presenting with a NSTEMI or UA, and there appears to be several reasons for delayed angiography. Lack of angiogram slots due to bed capacity issues, particularly with winter pressures has been highlighted as an important reason for delay. Measures need to be taken to improve compliance with the national 72-hour time target. <h3>Conflict of Interest</h3> nil

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealthcare Systems and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207