AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2641-0419/379
1 University of Michigan Hospital, 1500 E Medical Center Dr, Ann Arbor, MI 48109
2 Stony Brook University Hospital, 101 Nicolls Rd, Stony Brook, NY 11794
*Corresponding Author: Mohammed Al-Sadawi, University of Michigan Hospital, 1500 E Medical Center Dr, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.
Citation: Mohammed Al-Sadawi, Michael Tao, Simrat Dhaliwal, Ravi Masson, William Lawson, et al, (2024), Timing of Coronary Angiography for Patients Without ST-Segment Elevation After Cardiac Arrest: A Systematic review and Meta-Analysis. J. Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, 7(1); DOI:10.31579/2641-0419/379
Copyright: © 2024, Mohammed Al-Sadawi. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 18 December 2023 | Accepted: 25 December 2023 | Published: 05 January 2024
Keywords: percutanmus translumiinal coronary angioplasty; coronary artery perforation; coronary artery rupture
Background/Aim: Although early coronary angiography (CAG) is currently recommended in patients with out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) with ST segment elevation on electrocardiogram (EKG), the benefits in OHCA patients without ST segment elevation is unclear. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the association between timing of CAG and clinical outcomes in patients with OHCA without ST segment elevation on EKG.
Methods: We performed a literature search for studies reporting an association between timing of CAG and study endpoints. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. The secondary endpoints neurological outcome and need for dialysis. The search included the following databases: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The search was not restricted to time or publication status.
Results: A total of 17 studies with 8118 participants (3447 with early CAG vs 4671 with late/no CAG) were included. The mean duration of follow-up was 138 days. Early CAG showed a trend toward reduction in all-cause mortality but this was not statistically significant (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.60-1.14; p=0.25). Early CAG showed a trend toward favorable neurological outcome but this was not statistically significant (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48-1.18; p=0.21. Early CAG was not associated with increased risk for acute renal failure requiring hemodialysis (HD) (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.73-1.38; p=0.99). Subgroup analysis by time to CAG demonstrated that early CAG was associated with increased all-cause mortality if performed immediately (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.02-1.66; p=0.03), but decreased all-cause mortality if performed within 6 hours or within 24 hours (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58-0.90; p<0.01; OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.14-0.79; p=0.01).
Conclusions: Early CAG in patients presenting after OHCA without ST segment elevation may be beneficial compared to late/no CAG if performed after initial patient stabilization.
ACS : acute coronary syndrome
ARF : acute renal failure
CAG : coronary angiography
OHCA : Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
STEMI : ST- elevation myocardial infarction
Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a global public health challenge, affecting approximately 3.8 million individuals annually [1]. Mortality rates are estimated to be greater than 50% and only 10% of patients are expected to experience favorable neurological outcomes [2, 3]. Acute coronary syndrome (ACS), specifically ST- elevation myocardial infarction, accounts for a large proportion of cases presenting as OHCA [4]. The occluded culprit lesion results in significant myocardial injury, which in turns leads to cardiac arrest, as well as increased risk of rearrest and adverse cardiovascular outcomes [5].
It is rationalized that alleviating the obstruction may assist in salvaging the myocardium and improve survival and outcomes. However, selection of optimal OHCA patients for revascularization to alleviate the obstructive lesion remains a contentious challenge. For years, early revascularization in STEMI patients is standard of care, representing Class I guidelines from the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology [6]. Class IIa guidelines recommend coronary angiography (CAG) in patients without ST elevations without an obvious noncardiac etiology [6]. Nevertheless, the usefulness of revascularization in patients without ST elevations remains controversial as these patients are less likely to experience acute coronary artery lesions [7]. Thus, OHCA without ST elevations poses clinical and therapeutic challenges to physicians.
A direct comparison of early CAG in OHCA without ST elevations to outcomes may assist in clinical management. In this paper, we summarize the evidence linking a diagnosis of OHCA without ST elevations to all-cause mortality, neurologic recovery, and risk of acute renal failure (ARF). Moreover, we summarize the impact of immediate vs delayed CAG on all-cause mortality.
Data Search
This systematic review was performed in adherence to the guidelines of the PRISMA statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses). The review was performed using a preset protocol in December 2022. The primary endpoint was mortality. Secondary endpoints included Secondary endpoints included arrhythmias, neurological outcomes, and renal replacement therapy. We performed a database search for studies reporting on the association between timing of CAG and outcomes and safety endpoints in patients with non ST elevation cardiac arrest.
Search Strategy
A systematic search was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for relevant literature that reported the association between timing of CAG and outcomes and safety endpoints in patients with non ST elevation cardiac arrest. Two independent reviewers performed an electronic search using the following keywords: “early coronary angiography”, "coronary angiography", “outcomes”, “outcome”, “mortality”, and “Prediction”. The references of the screened studies, systematic reviews, review articles, and meta-analyses were manually reviewed for potential studies. After identifying relevant studies, the full texts of the selected articles were examined by both reviewers based on preplanned inclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved by consensus.
Study Selection
Studies were selected using the PICO [8] (patient/population, intervention, comparison and outcomes) format to include those that studied patients with cardiac arrest with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (Population), comparing early coronary angiography (Intervention) to delayed coronary angiography (Comparison), and assessing for all-cause mortality, arrhythmias, neurological outcomes, renal replacement therapy (Outcomes). Studies that did not separate ST elevation and non-ST elevation populations were excluded.
Data Extraction
Two reviewers (RM and MT) independently extracted the study data using a predefined data extraction sheet. Variables that were extracted from the studies included: Lead author, year of publication, study design, total patients on each group, risk factors, mean follow-up, mean age, and gender.
Statistical analysis
Meta-analysis was performed using Cochrane Review Manager (RevMan) software, version 5. We used a random-effects model to examine the association between strain imaging and outcomes, which were presented with an odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The extent of heterogeneity was determined by I2 (ranging from 0% to 100%). Statistical significance was considered with a P-value < 0.05 and all tests were 2-sided.
Literature Search and Study Selection
We identified 398 eligible studies from our literature search. After screening all studies, 28 eligible studies were selected for full text review. 17 studies were identified to be eligible for meta-analysis for the planned outcomes. Details of the selection process is presented in (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Prisma Flow Chart.
Flow diagram depicts study selection for inclusion in the meta-analysis according to the PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Study and Patient Characteristics
A total of 17 studies with 8118 participants (3447 with early CAG vs 4671 with late/no CAG) were included. The mean duration of follow-up was 138 days. Mean age was 62 years and 25% were females. Details of baseline demographic data is presented in (Table 1).
| Name | Year | Type | Follow-up (days) | Age (year) | Gender (%male) | Initial VT/VF | Initial PEA/asystole % | Early Total | Late Total | Late Total CAG | Early Time to CAG (Hours) | Late Time to CAG (Hours) |
| Bro-Jeppesen | 2012 | Pro | 30 | 61 | 80 | 184 | 60 | 82 | 162 | 57 | <12> | >12 |
| Hollenbeck | 2014 | Retro | 176 | 60 | 71 | 269 | 0 | 122 | 147 | 41 | <24> | >24 |
| Dankiewicz | 2015 | Pro | 426 | 66 | 79 | 409 | 135 | 252 | 292 | 94 | <6> | >6 |
| Kern | 2015 | Retro | X | 61 | 71 | 174 | 48 | 183 | 365 | 64 | <2> | >2 |
| Kleissner | 2015 | Pro | 180 | 58 | 79 | 73 | 26 | 25 | 74 | 31 | <2> | >2 |
| Garcia | 2016 | Pro | X | 55 | 77 | 303 | 0 | 130 | 73 | 32 | <6> | >6 |
| Patterson | 2017 | Pro | 30 | 61 | 86 | 36 | 0 | 18 | 18 | 14 | immediate | >48 |
| Shin | 2017 | Pro | X | 63 | 71 | 213 | 388 | 138 | 469 | 0 | <24> | X |
| Elfwen | 2018 | Retro | 30 | 66 | 79 | 799 | 0 | 275 | 524 | 166 | <24> | >24 |
| Elfwen | 2019 | Pro | 7 | 70 | 68 | 42 | 32 | 38 | 40 | 12 | Immediate | >24 |
| Kim | 2019 | Retro | 30 | 57 | 75 | 104 | 123 | 112 | 115 | 115 | Immediate | >2 |
| Lemkes | 2019 | Pro | 90 | 65 | 79 | 538 | 0 | 265 | 265 | 172 | <2> | >2 |
| Kern | 2020 | Pro | 180 | 65 | 79 | 75 | 23 | 49 | 50 | 24 | <2> | >6 |
| Desch | 2021 | Pro | 30 | 70 | 70 | 268 | 215 | 253 | 265 | 165 | Immediate | >24 |
| Song | 2021 | Pro | 180 | 59 | 73 | 339 | 339 | 231 | 447 | 104 | <6> | >6 |
| Hauw-Berlemont | 2022 | RCT | 180 | 65 | 70 | 88 | 183 | 126 | 138 | 74 | immediate | >48 |
| Janssens | 2022 | Retro | 360 | 63 | 70 | 1009 | 184 | 1148 | 1227 | 600 | <12> | >12 |
Early CAG showed a trend toward reduction in all-cause mortality but this was not statistically significant (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.60-1.14; p=0.25) (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Association of Early vs Late/No CAG with All-Cause Mortality
Early CAG showed a trend toward favorable neurological outcome but this was not statistically significant (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48-1.18; p=0.21) (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Association of Early vs Late/No CAG with Neurological Outcome
Early CAG was not associated with increased risk for acute renal failure requiring hemodialysis (HD) (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.73-1.38; p=0.99). (Figure 4)
Figure 4: Association of Early vs Late/No CAG with Need for HD
Subgroup analysis by time to CAG demonstrated that early CAG was associated with increased all-cause mortality if performed immediately (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.02-1.66; p=0.03), but decreased all-cause mortality if performed within 6 hours or within 24 hours (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58-0.90; p<0 p=0.01)>
Figure 5: Subanalysis to test association Between Immediate CAG and All-Cause Mortality, CAG < 6>
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the role of CAG, in patients with OHCA without ST elevations, on outcomes. We found early CAG is associated with a trend toward reduction in all-cause mortality and favorable neurological outcomes, however, immediate CAG is associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality, which is in drastic contrast to delaying CAG to 6-24 hours.
Acute coronary artery occlusion remains the leading cause of OHCA, representing 70-80% of cases [9, 10]. However, in patients presenting in cardiac arrest without ST elevations, the beneficial role of CAG is conflicting. The results of our study supported the findings in the largest randomized trial, to date, evaluating this topic, Coronary Angiography After Cardiac Arrest (COACT) trial, which neither demonstrated significant improvements in morality, nor safety concerns, such as ARF, for early angiography [11]. These results may partially be explained by OHCA patients without ST elevations are less likely to experience significantly obstructive coronary lesions. Given these irregular, non-significant stenotic lesions, it is more difficult to achieve successful outcomes with CAG because TIMI blood flow is not drastically affected, and CAG does not successfully salvage at-risk myocardium [12].
Another potential explanation for the lack of significance seen with regards to outcomes, especially favorable neurologic recovery, is post-cardiac arrest syndrome. Post cardiac arrest syndrome is classified as multiorgan failure as a result of ischemic reperfusion injury, which drastically affects the brain, resulting in neurologic injury. Death from neurologic injury in OHCA patients is three times more likely than from a cardiac etiology [11, 13]. Thus, it is possible a trend towards, but not significant, neurologic improvement was seen in CAG patients because most patients died from neurologic complications and were excluded from statistical analysis.
Moreover, cardiac arrest is marked by decreased cardiac output and elevated afterload, both of which may contribute to hypotension, vasoconstriction of afferent arterioles, and ultimately decreased renal perfusion. OHCA patients often require vasopressors to maintain a blood pressure that is compatible with life, which results in further vasoconstriction. This vicious cycle is perpetuated which likely leads to a progressive decline in renal function. ARF has been closely linked to the intensity of ischemia–reperfusion injury after OHCA [14-17]. Thus, CAG may not result in an increased risk of ARF requiring HD because OHCA patients are already at a baseline risk for ARF given the adverse event. On the other hand, immediate CAG was significantly associated with increased all-cause mortality, while delaying a CAG to 6-24 hours was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality. This is likely secondary to optimization of hemodynamics. Hypotension, as stated above, is poorly tolerated in OHCA patients because of the reduction in organ perfusion [18]. Gaieski et al explored the benefits of early hemodynamic stabilization post-cardiac arrest with titration of fluids, vasopressors, and mechanical support [19]. Their study was underpowered and unable to evaluate survival benefits; however, they emphasized the importance of further assessing benefits of patient stabilization prior to intervention.
This issue was discussed in other meta-analyses, Abusnina et al. [20] reviewed 6 randomised controlled trials for patients wih OHCA and reported that early CAG is not associated with reduced 30-day mortality when compared to patients who underwent delayed CAG.We discussed that in our work as most of these trial did CAG within the first 6 hours which showed no benefits, however, we showed that doing it afterwards was assocoiated with better outcomes that delayed approach.
Our review has several limitations. First, the studies experienced significant heterogenicity, especially regarding all-cause mortality and neurologic outcomes. Secondly, not all studies specified the degree of obstruction seen on CAG, which made it difficult to distinguish results based on obstructive vs nonobstructive coronary artery disease, Third, only a few studies distinguished the type of mortality. Fourth, our study was limited to all-cause mortality, neurologic recovery and ARF; however, future studies may benefit by focusing on quality of life and other cardiovascular outcomes post-OHCA.
Our present systematic review and meta-analysis has important clinical implications. OHCA patients without ST elevations who undergo CAG experience a trend toward, but not significant, reduction in all-cause mortality and improvement in neurologic outcomes without an increased risk of ARF requiring HD. This is likely due to these patients experiencing nonobstructive coronary artery lesions which do not benefit from revascularization. Despite the encouraging results of this recent meta-analysis, several questions regarding this form of therapy remain unanswered, particularly the effect of early mechanical support in addition to CAG. We require more evidence before we can extend these findings (and recommendations) to patients.
Our review has several limitations. First, the studies experienced significant heterogenicity, especially regarding all-cause mortality and neurologic outcomes. Secondly, not all studies specified the degree of obstruction seen on CAG, which made it difficult to distinguish results based on obstructive vs nonobstructive coronary artery disease, Third, only a few studies distinguished the type of mortality. Fourth, our study was limited to all-cause mortality, neurologic recovery and ARF; however, future studies may benefit by focusing on quality of life and other cardiovascular outcomes post-OHCA.
None
The authors report no relevant conflicts of interest.
The systematic review was conducted with a protocol in accordance with the Preferred Reporting of Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
