Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,048

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Randomized Trial of Preventive Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction

Open access
Wald, David S., Morris, Joan K., Wald, Nicholas J., Chase, Alexander J., Edwards, Richard J., Hughes, Liam O., Berry, Colin, Oldroyd, Keith G.·2013·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to treat the artery responsible for the infarct (infarct, or culprit, artery) improves prognosis. The value of PCI in noninfarct coronary arteries with major stenoses (preventive PCI) is unknown. METHODS: From 2008 through 2013, at five centers in the United Kingdom, we enrolled 465 patients with acute STEMI (including 3 patients with left bundle-branch block) who were undergoing infarct-artery PCI and randomly assigned them to either preventive PCI (234 patients) or no preventive PCI (231 patients). Subsequent PCI for angina was recommended only for refractory angina with objective evidence of ischemia. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiac causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or refractory angina. An intention-to-treat analysis was used. RESULTS: By January 2013, the results were considered conclusive by the data and safety monitoring committee, which recommended that the trial be stopped early. During a mean follow-up of 23 months, the primary outcome occurred in 21 patients assigned to preventive PCI and in 53 patients assigned to no preventive PCI (infarct-artery-only PCI), which translated into rates of 9 events per 100 patients and 23 per 100, respectively (hazard ratio in the preventive-PCI group, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21 to 0.58; P<0.001). Hazard ratios for the three components of the primary outcome were 0.34 (95% CI, 0.11 to 1.08) for death from cardiac causes, 0.32 (95% CI, 0.13 to 0.75) for nonfatal myocardial infarction, and 0.35 (95% CI, 0.18 to 0.69) for refractory angina. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing infarct-artery PCI, preventive PCI in noninfarct coronary arteries with major stenoses significantly reduced the risk of adverse cardiovascular events, as compared with PCI limited to the infarct artery. (Funded by Barts and the London Charity; PRAMI Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN73028481.).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa1305520

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,048

Metadata

Authors
Wald, D. S., Morris, J. K., Wald, N. J., Chase, A. J., Edwards, R. J., Hughes, L. O., Berry, C., & Oldroyd, K. G.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2013-09-19
Volume
369
Issue
12
Pages
1115-1123
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2132861593
Cited by
1,048
References
0
FWCI
103.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized Trial of Preventive Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1305520
The paper
Wald, D. S., Morris, J. K., Wald, N. J., Chase, A. J., Edwards, R. J., Hughes, L. O., Berry, C., & Oldroyd, K. G. (2013). Randomized Trial of Preventive Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1305520

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.