AUCTORES
Chat with usResearch Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2641-0419/321
1 Department of Cardiolgoy, Max Super Specialty Hospital, Bathinda, Punjab, India.
2 Department of cardiology, Aster Hospital, Mankhool, Dubai, Al Quasis, UAE.
3 Department of Medicine, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
4 Department of Cardiology, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44195, USA.
5 Department of Cardiology, Command Hospital Chandimandir, Panchkula, Haryana, India.
6 Department of Cardiology, MBBS, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, India.
*Corresponding Author: Rohit Mody, House no. 438, Model Town Phase 2, Near Model Town Phase 2 Market, Bathinda - 151001, Punjab, India.
Citation: Rohit Mody, Debabrata Dash, Bhavya Mody, Ankit Agrawal, Inderjeet Singh Monga, et al, (2023), Clinical Outcomes of Direct or Direct like Stenting in Patients Undergoing Primary Pci for Stemi, J. Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, 6(6); DOI:10.31579/2641-0419/321
Copyright: © 2023, Rohit Mody. 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: 06 June 2023 | Accepted: 12 July 2023 | Published: 27 July 2023
Keywords: stemi; drug-eluting stent; death, stroke; myocardial infarction; stent thrombosis
Background
Significant Improvement in reperfusion markers is observed by direct stenting (DS) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. However, clinical outcomes are variable, and information on the number of patients with STEMI who can be treated with DS or direct-like stenting is lacking.
Aim
To determine the feasibility and clinical outcomes of DS or direct-like stenting in patients with acute STEMI
Methods
This single-center and retrospective clinical study analyzed data from 514 patients admitted to the hospital with STEMI from October 2016 to March 2021. Most of these patients were treated with DS or direct-like stenting, and the operator was as direct as possible in performing the procedure. The outcomes were noted at the 2-year follow-up, and the incidence of on-table complications was analyzed.
Results
The total motality was 11.2% and the major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were seen in 13.62% at the 2-year follow-up. The post-procedural thrombolysis in myocardial infarction grade 3 flow was achieved in >86% of patients. A lower risk of edge dissection was observed. Our study revealed that DS reduced radiation exposure time, procedure time, and contrast volume used. Patients with cardiogenic shock have worst outcomes than patients with normal hemodynamics. It is a well-known fact that the cardiogenic shock patients have worst outcomes than normal hemodynamic patients. We analyzed this group of patients separately, so as to see the still better outcomes with DS in this high-risk sub-set of patients.
Conclusions
Study results demonstrated that DS or direct-like stenting is a quite promising method in most patients with STEMI and causes fewer on-table complications. Additionally, it supports the hypothesis that DS may result in better 2-year follow-up results.
The primary percutaneous coronary intervention strategy is the preferred method for restoring blood flow in cases of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, unanswered questions remain about potential complications such as reperfusion injuries [1], the no-reflow phenomenon, and distal microvascular embolization. Thus, newer strategies are being explored, such as direct stenting (DS), to address these issues [2]. DS is a technique where the stent compresses the loose material of the plaque and thrombus to prevent distal embolization [3]. A recent meta-analysis of five small trials revealed that DS improved reperfusion [4] and reduced the no-reflow phenomenon and in-hospital mortality, but the sample size was too small to draw firm conclusions. Additionally, data about the use of adjunctive medical therapy and drug-eluting stent (DES) are limited [2]. This case series indicates the use of DS or direct-like stenting in timely PCI in reducing no-reflow, improving thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow, and preventing on-table complications, which could lead to better long-term outcomes.
Materials and Methods
Study design and population
This observational, retrospective, and single-center study enrolled 514 consecutive patients at the Max Super Specialty Hospital in Bathinda, India, who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting from October 2016 to March 2021. This study enrolled patients aged over 18 years based on their presentation with consistent symptoms of ongoing ischemia evidenced between 12 and 24 h and within 12 h of the onset of STEMI symptoms. The primary modality of treatment was DS, but direct-like stenting was performed in cases where DS was not feasible. By direct-like stenting, it was the practice to do either thrombosuction or making way with a 1.5 mm small balloon, so that the distal landing zone was visible and then the procedure was completed by stenting across the lesion and the clot. Hence, it was named like direct-like stenting. Measures were taken to ensure that the stenting was as direct as possible. Participants with aspirin and ticagrelor contraindications, other contraindications for performing PCI, pregnancy, heavily calcified or excessive proximal tortuosity, or a lack of relevant patient or procedural data were excluded from the study. The study did not require medical ethics committee approval as the patients were included in the study as part of their normal day-to-day treatment.
Study protocol
During primary PCI, DS was performed in patients who had TIMI flow of ≥1 during initial injection or after wire insertion. Alternative techniques, such as ballooning with a small balloon or thrombosuction, were utilized before DS in cases where DS was not feasible. This type of intervention was labeled as direct-like stenting. The idea was to disturb the clot as minimally as possible and to be as direct as possible in deploying the stent. Some patients required thrombosuction before the distal landing zone was visible. DS was considered to be successfully performed if <30>
1A: 100% lesion with high grade clot burden in LAD (arrow)
1B: TIMI grade-3 flow demonstrated by post PCI CAG (arrow).
†DS: Direct stenting PCI: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; CAG: Coronary Angiogram; LAD: Left Anterior Descending artery; TIMI: Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction.
Table 1: Case 1 Pre and Post PCI CAG after DS
2A: 99% lesion in proximal LAD demonstrated by CAG (arrow)
2B: TIMI grade-3 flow demonstrated by post PCI CAG (arrow).
†DS: Direct Stenting PCI: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; CAG: Coronary Angiogram; LAD: Left Anterior Descending artery; TIMI: Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction.
Figure 2: Case 2 pre and post PCI CAG after DS
3A: 100% lesion with high grade clot in proximal RCA demonstrated by CAG (arrow)
3B: TIMI grade-3 flow demonstrated by post PCI CAG (arrow).
†DS: Direct Stenting PCI: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; CAG: Coronary Angiogram; RCA: Right Coronary artery; TIMI: Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction.
Figure 3: Case 3 pre and post PCI CAG after DS
4A: 100% lesion in LAD with high grade clot demonstrated by CAG (arrow)
4B: TIMI grade-3 flow demonstrated by Post PCI CAG (arrow).
†PCI: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; CAG: Coronary Angiogram; LAD: Left Anterior Descending artery; TIMI: Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction.
Figure 4: Case 4 Pre and Post PCI CAG
What did we study?
From October 2016 to March 2021, 514 patients with STEMI were treated with DS or direct-like stenting technique by DES implantation. We evaluated patients with stable hemodynamics and cardiogenic shock separately, because of gross difference in outcomes. Practically the stent was deployed by DS (372 patients), thrombosuction with DS (51 patients), thrombosuction and pre-dilatation with a small balloon (25 patients) (direct-like stenting), and pre-dilatation with a small balloon (66 patients) (direct-like stenting). Either the thrombosuction before deploying the stent directly or a pre dilation with a very small 1.5-mm balloon was performed and the stent was deployed if the distal landing zone was visible, or both in direct-like stenting.
After PCI, these patients were assessed angiographically and the outcomes were recorded. Clinical events, such as cardiac death, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and myocardial infarction (MI) were noted in 1-month, 3-month, and 2-year in-hospital follow-ups. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics of patients are shown in Table 1 and lesion characteristics are shown in Table 2.
Variables | STEMI with stable hemodynamics | STEMI with cardiogenic shock |
Total pts (%) | 376 (73.1) | 138 (26.9) |
Age, mean [years] | 62.0 ±12 | 65.1 ±12.5 |
Smoker, n (%) | 190 (50.5) | 64 (46.4) |
Ejection fraction, mean (%) | 47.9 ±9.1 | 36.1 ±11 |
Diabetes mellitus, n (%) | 151 (40.2) | 56 (40.6) |
Hypertension, n (%) | 173 (46.0) | 63 (45.7) |
Hyperlipidemia, n (%) | 67 (17.8) | 31 (22.5) |
Prior MI, n (%) | 35 (9.3) | 28 (20.3) |
Prior PCI, n (%) | 37 (9.8) | 11 (8.0) |
Prior CABG, n (%) | 6(1.6) | 4 (2.9) |
Renal insufficiency, n (%) | 47 (12.5) | 21 (15.2) |
Ischemia time, mean [min] | 116.2 ±40.8 | 114.1 ±39.1 |
† PTS: Patients; STEMI: ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction; MI: Myocardial Infarction; PCI: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; CABG: Coronary Artery Bypass Graft
Table 1: Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics
Parameter | STEMI with normal hemodynamics (n = 376) | STEMI with cardiogenic shock (n = 138) |
Culprit artery: | ||
Left anterior descending | 112 (29.8) | 46 (33.3) |
Left circumflex | 28 (7.4) | 23 (16.7) |
Right coronary | 210 (55.9) | 53 (38.4) |
Other | 26 (6.9) | 16 (11.6) |
Procedural complication: | 28 (7.4) | 20 (14.5) |
Edge dissection | 11 (2.9) | 9 (6.5) |
No reflow | 17 (4.5) | 11 (8.0) |
Procedural characteristics: | ||
Post-dilation | 50 (13.3) | 16 (11.6) |
Aspiration thrombectomy | 22 (5.9) | 8 (5.8) |
Stent length, mean [mm] | 18.8 ±6.22 | 21.92 ±6.62 |
Stent diameter, mean [mm] | 2.71 ±0.21 | 2.30 ±0.16 |
Procedure time, mean [min] | 46.0 ±12.1 | 47.1 ±15.5 |
Fluoroscopy time, mean [min] | 9.6 ±4.1 | 13.0 ±5.6 |
Contrast volume, mean [ml] | 123.2 ±51.1 | 152.5 ±85.0 |
Postprocedural TIMI flow III, n (%) | 354 (94.1) | 124 (89.9) |
Lesion location: | ||
Proximal | 117 (31.1) | 51 (37.0) |
Mid | 207 (55.1) | 64 (46.4) |
Distal | 52 (13.8) | 23 (16.7) |
Additional stent, n (%) | 78 (20.7) | 30 (21.7) |
Multivessel disease, n (%) | 50 (13.3) | 26 (18.8) |
Calcific lesion, n (%) | 50 (13.3) | 22 (15.9) |
Thrombus burden: | ||
Low thrombus burden | 208 (55.3) | 51 (37.0) |
High thrombus burden | 172 (45.7) | 87 (63.0) |
Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors | 300 (79.8) | 114 (82.6) |
Bifurcation stenting | 8 (2.1) | 2 (1.4) |
Thrombectomy | 56 (14.90) | 20 (14.5) |
TIMI flow at baseline | ||
0 | 211 (56.1) | 76 (55.1) |
1 | 97 (25.8) | 34 (24.6) |
2 | 30 (8) | 11 (8.0) |
3 | 38 (10.1) | 13 (9.4) |
Final TIMI flow 3 | 320 (85.1) | 120 (87.0) |
No reflow | 2 (0.5) | 1 (0.7) |
Dissection | 8 (2.1) | 2 (1.4) |
Distal embolization | 16 (4.3) | 7 (5.1) |
Average contrast volume used | 50±20 | 40±10 |
IABP use | Nil | 131 (95) |
† STEMI: ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction; TIMI: Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction
Table 2: Lesion characteristics
Data collection
Retrospective data collection included information on patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and procedure details. The thrombus burden, calcification state, and TIMI flow grade were evaluated by a team of two expert interventional cardiologists after the procedure. A coronary angiography (CAG) laboratory was used to collect data on procedural time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast media volume. Various sources, such as phone calls, registry databases, and electronic medical records were used to collect information on various in-hospital and clinical outcomes, such as in-
hospital death, recurrent MIs, target lesion revascularization (TLR), TVR, and definite stent thrombosis (ST). Routine or control angiography was not performed in the absence of any clinical indication during the follow-up time, but it was performed within the 2-year follow-up after the initial PCI coronary angiographies driven by various events.
Study endpoints and definitions
The occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) defined as TLR, TVR, MI, or definite ST during the follow-up was considered the primary endpoint of this study. In-hospital patient death and in-hospital TLR were considered as the secondary endpoint. PCI and bypass grafting were considered TVR as they are the procedures targeting the target vessel. TLR was defined as the need for additional PCI or bypass grafting of the treated lesion within the stent or a segment 5 mm proximal or distal to the initial stent margins. MI was defined in this analysis as consistent with the most recent guidelines [5]. The criteria of the Academic Research Consortium [6] were used to determine definite ST. The time from the chest pain onset to the inflation of the first balloon during the primary PCI was defined as the total ischemic time. TIMI thrombus classification system was used to characterize the angiographic thrombus burden, and it was characterized by patients with high thrombus burden (grades 4 and 5) and patients with low thrombus burden (grades 1, 2, and 3) [7]. Additionally, procedural complications, such as no-reflow and edge dissection, were considered in this study.
Results
How was the study executed?
What are the essential results?
†MACE: Major Adverse Cardiac Events; STEMI: ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction.
Figure 5: Kaplan Meier curve showing comparison of all cause death at follow-up of 2-years.
†MACE: Major Adverse Cardiac Events; STEMI: ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction.
Figure 6: Kaplan Meier curve showing comparison of MACE free survival at follow-up of 2-years.
Total number of patients of cardiogenic shock (n = 138) | |
SCAI stage of cardiogenic shock | 48 patients in stage D & E |
Mean Systolic pressure | 72 ± 18 mm of Hg |
Mean diastolic pressure | 52 ± 12 mm of Hg |
Mean of mean pressure | 58 ± 20 mm of Hg |
Mean pulmonary artery pressure | 20/10 ± 20/15 mm of Hg |
Mean PAPI | <1> |
Mean Cardiac output | 3 ± 1.6 L/min |
Number of inotropic agents used | >3 in 80% patients |
IABP used | 95% |
Table 3: Details of Hemodynamics in cardiogenic shock patients
Clinical Outcomes in-hospital | ||
Parameter | STEMI with normal hemodynamics (n = 376) | STEMI with cardiogenic shock (n = 138) |
MI | 3 (0.79) | 2 (1.44) |
TLR | 2 (0.53) | 1 (0.72) |
TVR | 3 (0.79) | 2 (1.44) |
ST | 1 (0.26) | 2 (1.44) |
MACE | 7 (1.86) | 4 (2.89) |
All-cause death | 1 (0.26) | 27 (19.56) |
Clinical outcomes at follow-up of 1-month | ||
Parameter | STEMI with normal hemodynamics (n = 376) | STEMI with cardiogenic shock (n = 138) |
MI | 4 (1.06) | 3 (2.17) |
TLR | 3 (0.79) | 2 (1.44) |
TVR | 5 (1.32) | 3 (2.17) |
ST | 1 (0.26) | 2 (1.44) |
MACE | 9 (2.39) | 6 (4.34) |
All-cause death | 2 (0.53) | 29 (21.01) |
Clinical outcomes at follow-up of 1-year | ||
Parameter | STEMI with normal hemodynamics (n = 376) | STEMI with cardiogenic shock (n = 138) |
MI | 11 (2.92) | 7 (5.07) |
TLR | 6 (1.59) | 4 (2.89) |
TVR | 10 (2.65) | 5 (3.62) |
ST | 2 (0.53) | 3 (2.17) |
MACE | 19 (5.05) | 8 (5.79) |
All-cause death | 7 (1.86) | 34 (24.63) |
Clinical outcomes at follow-up of 2-years | ||
Parameter | STEMI with normal hemodynamics (n = 376) | STEMI with cardiogenic shock (n = 138) |
MI | 20 (5.3) | 10 (7.2) |
TLR | 8 (2.1) | 9 (6.5) |
TVR | 16 (4.3) | 7 (5.1) |
ST | 2 (0.5) | 4 (2.89) |
MACE | 44 (11.70) | 26 (18.8) |
All-cause death | 8 (2.1) | 41 (29.71) |
† STEMI: ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction; MI: Myocardial Infarction; TLR: Target Lesion Revascularization; TVR: Target Vessel Revascularization; MACE: Major Adverse Cardiac events
Table 4: Clinical outcomes and follow-up at in-hospital, 1-month, 1-year and 2-years.
PCI is the preferred reperfusion strategy in patients with STEMI. Some studies have revealed that DS results in less distal embolization and microvascular obstruction. DS is widely used in practice, but with no currently accepted guidelines [8]. Our present study retrospectively analyzed patients of STEMI who were offered primary angioplasty promptly. We included all the incomer patients who met our inclusion criteria for DS or direct-like stenting. This strategy is feasible in most of the patients. We analyzed patients with cardiogenic shock and normal hemodynamics at presentation separately. Our article emphasizes the use of DS rather than the comparison of these groups.
The TAPAS [9], TASTE [10], and TOTAL [11] studies are three of the largest randomized clinical trials that compare the use of routine manual thrombus aspiration during PCI with PCI alone in patients with STEMI. Researchers from these studies derived the largest observational data from the Thrombectomy Trialists Collaboration (TTC) [12]. This study looked into the use of DS with thrombus aspiration to improve cardiac reperfusion and clinical outcomes by analyzing data from the TTC. The study compared the use of DS to traditional stenting during primary PCI and evaluated the role of aspiration thrombectomy [13]. Only 32% of the 17,329 patients in the study underwent DS. The study revealed that DS was possible in more patients after aspiration thrombectomy, and that aspiration thrombectomy was used to facilitate DS. The contrast was less used in DS, and the fluoroscopy time was shortened (P < 0>
The study revealed lower rates of cardiovascular mortality and cerebrovascular incidents at the 1-month follow-up (1.7% vs. 1.9%). Additionally, a negligible rate of death from any cause, heart attack, or ST was observed, as well as a lower rate at which vessels needed to be re-vascularized after 1 year. Previous research has attributed a higher rate of stent failure to the presence of malapposition and insufficient lesion coverage, but this study reassuringly revealed no higher risk of these consequences than previously thought. Additionally, the study revealed that a lower number of patients undergoing DS had inadequate ST-segment resolution and MBG of 0 and 1 in the TAPAS [9] and TOTAL [11] studies, respectively. These studies utilized thrombectomy devices before DS in a significant number of patients, which suggests that only a fraction of DS potential has been used, although thrombectomy may lead to distal embolization.
Unfortunately, the data from these trials do not yet demonstrate a clear advantage of DS over traditional stenting. Notably, DS decreases distal embolization, even if the capture of embolized material by distal protection devices and the removal of the clot by aspiration thrombectomy should have affected the result positively. However, a noticeable direct impact has been difficult to achieve. Distal thrombus embolization and plaque-induced STEMI have already occurred upon reperfusion initiation via primary PCI. The problem could become even more severe if reperfusion injury sets in. Accordingly, device-based therapies can only affect a single component of reperfusion in STEMI. Mortality and improve outcomes in the modern era were significantly reduced with the help of optimized PCI and the finest available adjunctive medication. Any further improvement is unlikely to be noticeable in clinical practice because of the already low mortality rate in simple STEMI (<2>
The Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry revealed notably low rates of restenosis and ST. These positive findings in research may be attributed to the use of the most recent generation of DES. We seem to make progress in the fight against restenosis. These results are already encouraging, but larger studies involving individuals with more severe complications, such as cardiogenic shock, are needed to make further progress [19].
A meta-analysis of 12 clinical trials entitled, “Comparing Direct Stenting with CS In Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes (ACS): A Meta-Analysis of 12 Clinical Trials,” [20] revealed that DS has better short-term outcomes, with fewer cases of the no-reflow phenomenon, and better long-term outcomes, with lower rates of mortality after 1 year.
Researchers of the LIPSIA CONDITIONING trial, which is a pre-defined sub-study, revealed that DS resulted in smaller infarct sizes on magnetic resonance imaging and reduced 6-month death rates when compared to CS [21].
Demonstrating the subtle impact of DS on mortality may be challenging because of the remarkable decrease in primary angioplasty mortality in recent years, which is now <2>
The key takeaway is that distal embolization is minimal when DS or a similar technique is performed even in patients with high-grade thrombus during STEMI. Direct-like stenting can be done by modification with a small balloon and/or after thrombosuction in patients in whom DS is not feasible. The success rate of DS can be increased using a deflated balloon, as supported by the literature [23].
A recent study evaluating very long-term clinical outcomes after DS in patients with STEMI indicates reduced long-term all-cause mortality and no relevant effect of the stenting technique on clinical outcomes in patients with large thrombus burden [24]. Additionally, our study seems to favor the 2-year MACE as compared to previous studies of primary angioplasty in MI as GUSTO-2 [25].
Study Limitations
This is a single-centre retrospective observational study with certain inherent limitations. Certain variables like left ventricular ejection fraction, length and diameter of stent were not analyzed in this study. In conventional stenting strategy, the Left anterior descending infarct-related artery was quite common which can affect the clinical outcomes. Other major limitation associated with the study is that only first-generation DES were implanted in patients. The only thrombus aspiration system used in this study was Rheolytic thrombectomy. It is an observational study and is not a comparison with conventional stenting hence, propensity score based methods cannot be done.
Why is this important?
The study suggests direct stenting or direct-like stenting as a feasible option for most patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI. This method simplifies the procedure, reduces the amount of contrast used, and minimizes complications. TIMI-3 flow is achieved in the majority of patients, and the risk of distal embolization was less. However, a randomized controlled trial is needed to further demonstrate the effectiveness of this strategy compared to traditional methods. This study can serve as a starting point for a hypothesis-making trial to investigate the use of DS and direct-like stenting in primary PCI as compared to conventional modality.
Author Contributions
The lead author of the clinical research is Dr Rohit Mody. Dr Debabrata Dash, Dr Bhavya Mody, Ankit Agrawal, Inderjeet Singh Monga and Lakshay Rastogi had equal and substantial contributions in the formation of this clinical research. They were involved in conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, resources, software, validation, visualization, writing - original draft, Writing, review & editing.
Acknowledgment
I thank Ms. Nikita and Mr. Rohit for assisting me to finalize the clinical research. Figures are edited by Jiwan Singh.
Availability of Data and Materials
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate
Ethical approval was not required since it is an accepted procedure
Consent for Publication
Written consent has been obtained to publish the case report from the guardian. The consent copy is available with the authors and ready to be submitted if required.
Disclosures: All authors have nothing to disclose.
Funding: There is no funding or financial conflicts of interest to disclose.
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