Mentions
Extended reach
Total likes
Video views
AI synopsis
The posts show a balanced view, noting that early intervention generally offers limited benefits except in high-risk groups, exemplified by mentions of the TIMACS trial and the GRACE risk score. The tone combines clinical references with discussions of practical implications, emphasizing the ongoing debate on timing and patient risk factors.
Most posts acknowledge that early intervention doesn't significantly benefit all patient groups but highlight benefits in high-risk individuals, showing moderate agreement with the study findings.
Discussions reveal curiosity about the nuances of timing and risk stratification, indicating moderate engagement and interest in the topic.
Users reference specific studies like TIMACS and mention details such as risk scores and clinical implications, demonstrating active engagement.
The conversations reflect an understanding that the research impacts clinical decision-making, especially concerning high-risk patients, indicating a moderate perceived impact.
The TIMACS study also did not show a benefit in reducing death/MI/stroke with an immediate/early (<24 hours) catheterization vs a delayed catheterization (>36 hours) in ACS without ST elevation https://t.co/1H6QLDlAsa https://t.co/3YhGNIKUNz
@yuripridemd @GruentzigG @GoodishIntent @GreggWStone @jaygirimd @haiderwarraich @hectortamezmd @aspergian1 @Radial_ICG @PLooserMD @MarkELindsay @rwyeh @PradTummala @Allison_Dupont I’m not fully up to date on the guidelines, but the literature on this is pretty clear that the only patients who benefit from very early cath are those with a GRACE risk score >140 (TIMACS trial). https://t.co/QNgToEmCM5
@CMichaelGibson TIMACS... https://t.co/QNgToEmCM5
@kjdelay1 @HeartOTXHeartMD @DrMarthaGulati @DBelardoMD There are a few trials-- the best one is probably TIMACS, which suggested no overall benefit but a subgroup analysis showed a reduction in patients with a GRACE risk score >140. https://t.co/kZNWRh1tYz
Everyday-Trial# TIMACS 2009 In patients with UA/NSTEMI, early intervention (<24hrs) led to no difference in mortality or cardiovascular events when compared to delayed intervention (>36hrs), except in patients at high risk (GRACE > 140) https://t.co/xaoSaD011x
This video discusses whether the paradigm of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) needs an update to the 'occlusion MI' approach. It explores implications for emergency cardiac care and patient outcomes…
A review paper prompted a discussion among cardiologists Bob Harrington Manesh Patel and Michael Gibson on whether the STsegment elevation myocardial infarction paradigm needs an update. The video explores the potential…
Everyday-Trial# TIMACS 2009 In patients with UA/NSTEMI, early intervention (<24hrs) led to no difference in mortality or cardiovascular events when compared to delayed intervention (>36hrs), except in patients at high risk (GRACE > 140) https://t.co/xaoSaD011x
@kjdelay1 @HeartOTXHeartMD @DrMarthaGulati @DBelardoMD There are a few trials-- the best one is probably TIMACS, which suggested no overall benefit but a subgroup analysis showed a reduction in patients with a GRACE risk score >140. https://t.co/kZNWRh1tYz
RT @djc795: @CMichaelGibson TIMACS... https://t.co/QNgToEmCM5
RT @CMichaelGibson: The TIMACS study also did not show a benefit in reducing death/MI/stroke with an immediate/early (<24 hours) catheteriz…
RT @CMichaelGibson: The TIMACS study also did not show a benefit in reducing death/MI/stroke with an immediate/early (<24 hours) catheteriz…
RT @CMichaelGibson: The TIMACS study also did not show a benefit in reducing death/MI/stroke with an immediate/early (<24 hours) catheteriz…
RT @CMichaelGibson: The TIMACS study also did not show a benefit in reducing death/MI/stroke with an immediate/early (<24 hours) catheteriz…
RT @CMichaelGibson: The TIMACS study also did not show a benefit in reducing death/MI/stroke with an immediate/early (<24 hours) catheteriz…
RT @CMichaelGibson: The TIMACS study also did not show a benefit in reducing death/MI/stroke with an immediate/early (<24 hours) catheteriz…
RT @CMichaelGibson: The TIMACS study also did not show a benefit in reducing death/MI/stroke with an immediate/early (<24 hours) catheteriz…
RT @CMichaelGibson: The TIMACS study also did not show a benefit in reducing death/MI/stroke with an immediate/early (<24 hours) catheteriz…
RT @djc795: @CMichaelGibson TIMACS... https://t.co/QNgToEmCM5
RT @djc795: @CMichaelGibson TIMACS... https://t.co/QNgToEmCM5
RT @CMichaelGibson: The TIMACS study also did not show a benefit in reducing death/MI/stroke with an immediate/early (<24 hours) catheteriz…
The TIMACS study also did not show a benefit in reducing death/MI/stroke with an immediate/early (<24 hours) catheterization vs a delayed catheterization (>36 hours) in ACS without ST elevation https://t.co/1H6QLDlAsa https://t.co/3YhGNIKUNz
@CMichaelGibson TIMACS... https://t.co/QNgToEmCM5
@yuripridemd @GruentzigG @GoodishIntent @GreggWStone @jaygirimd @haiderwarraich @hectortamezmd @aspergian1 @Radial_ICG @PLooserMD @MarkELindsay @rwyeh @PradTummala @Allison_Dupont I’m not fully up to date on the guidelines, but the literature on this is pretty clear that the only patients who benefit from very early cath are those with a GRACE risk score >140 (TIMACS trial). https://t.co/QNgToEmCM5
Early versus Delayed Invasive Intervention in Acute Coronary Syndromes | NEJM https://t.co/J0vrcP2kX5
CM
DM
DM
Dا
TD
MT
I
JJ
HR
ZB
DE
ET
MQ
TV
AF
EG