AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Chat with us
Short Communication | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2641-0419/380
Endocrinology Division, Department of Medicine, Olive View-UCLA Medical Center, David-Geffen UCLA Medical School, CA, USA.
*Corresponding Author: Nasser Mikhail, MD, Endocrinology Division, Department of Medicine, Olive View-UCLA Medical Center, David-Geffen UCLA Medical School, CA, USA.
Citation: Nasser Mikhail (2024), Total outflow graft thrombosis: From permanent circulatory support to temporary circulatory support by deactivating HeartMate 3™ and implanting Impella 5.5® in a high urgent bridge to transplant concept, J Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, 7(5); DOI: 10.31579/2641-0419/380
Copyright: © 2024, Nasser Mikhail. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 24 April 2024 | Accepted: 07 May 2024 | Published: 31 May 2024
Keywords: bempedoic acid, cardiovascular effects, mortality, primary prevention, secondary prevention.
Bempedoic acid is a cholesterol-lowering drug approved for reduction of the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and coronary revascularization in adults who are unable to take recommended statin therapy with established cardiovascular disease (CVD), or at high risk for a CVD event but without established CVD. However, reduction of CV events by bempedoic acid in patients with documented CVD is modest and not statistically significant. The CLEAR Outcomes trial is the largest randomized trial of bempedoic acid including 13,970 patients; 70% of whom had documented CVD (secondary prevention cohort), and 30% were considered high CV risk but without established CV disease (primary prevention cohort). The primary outcome of the CLEAR OUTCOMES trial was a composite of death from CV causes, nonfatal MI, nonfatal stroke, or coronary revascularization (MACE-4). After a median follow-up of 40.6 months, the incidence of CV event was significantly decreased in the bempedoic group versus the placebo group in the whole study population; hazard ratio (HR) 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.96; P=0.004). However, this decrease in CV events was mainly driven by the reduction of MACE-4 in the primary prevention cohort; HR 0.68 (95% CI, 0.53 to 0.87), whereas the corresponding reduction in the secondary prevention cohort was more modest; HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.01), Pinteraction=0.03. Results of a post-hoc analysis of the CLEAR Outcomes trial suggested possible increase in all-cause mortality; risk ratio (RR) 1.15 and CV mortality RR 1.21 in the secondary prevention patients. Conversely, in the primary prevention group, there was decrease in all-cause mortality RR 0.70 and CV mortality RR 0.58. While the investigators of the CLEAR Outcomes trial published results of the primary prevention group separately, they did not report those results in the larger secondary group despite greater number of CV events. A randomized trial evaluating bempedoic acid in patients with documented CVD is required to clarify its efficacy and safety in this group of patients. Until such trial is available, the use of bempedoic acid is not recommended for secondary prevention of CV disease.
Bempedoic acid deceases cholesterol synthesis by inhibiting ATP-citrate lipase (ACL), and thus works upstream of the enzyme 3-hydroxy-3methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibited by statins in the cholesterol synthesis pathway [1]. Decreased production of intra-hepatic cholesterol by bempedoic acid leads to upregulation of hepatic LDL-C receptors and increased clearance of LDL particles from the blood stream and subsequent lowering of circulating LDL-C levels [1]. Bempedoic acid is a prodrug that requires activation by a liver specific enzyme not present in skeletal muscle. This finding may explain the absence of muscle-associated adverse effects with use of bempedoic acid in contrast to statins [1]. The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) has approved bempedoic acid to reduce risk of MI or coronary revascularization in adults with established CVD who are unable to take recommended statin therapy [2]. Moreover, the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP) has recommended the use of bempedoic acid in patients with atherosclerotic CVD in combination with statins and other lipid-lowering drugs when the low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) targets were not met [3]. However, the previous indications by regulatory agencies and international societies may not be based on strong clinical evidence. Such evidence was derived from the results of the largest and longest-term randomized trial of bempedoic acid called the CLEAR Outcomes trial [4]. The latter study showed significant benefit of bempedoic acid in primary prevention but did not show convincing CV benefit of bempedoic acid in secondary prevention [4]. The main purpose of this article is to clarify the effects of bempedoic acid on hard CV endpoints in the primary and secondary prevention settings.
Overview of the CLEAR Outcomes trial
The CLEAR trial is a large (n=13,970) randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled international study [4]. Patients’ mean age was 66 years (range 21-92), 48% were women and 91% were Whites [4]. At study entry, mean body mass index (BMI) was 30.0 kg/m2, 45% of patients had type 2 diabetes, and mean LDL-C levels were 139 mg/dl [4]. All patients were statin-intolerant defined as being unable or unwilling to receive statins owing to an adverse effect [4]. Meanwhile, 23% of patients were tolerating “very low” dose of statin and still regarded as statin intolerant [4]. At baseline, 70% of patients had documented CVD (secondary-prevention patients) including coronary artery disease (51%), cerebrovascular atherosclerotic diseases (15%), and peripheral vascular diseases (12%) [4]. The remaining 30% of subjects were considered at high risk for CVD (primary-prevention patients) based on at least one of the following criteria: diabetes mellitus in women over 65 years of age or males over 60 years of age, a Reynolds Risk score >30% or a SCORE Risk score >7.5% over 10 years, coronary artery calcium > 400 Agatston units [4]. Patients were assigned to bempedoic acid 180 mg orally once daily (n=6,992) or matched placebo (n=6,978).
Main results of the CLEAR Outcomes trial
The primary outcome was a 4-component composite of death from CV causes, nonfatal MI, nonfatal stroke, or coronary revascularization (MACE-4) as assessed in a time-to-first event analysis [4]. After a median follow-up of 40.6 months, the incidence of a primary end-point event in the whole study population was significantly reduced with bempedoic acid than with placebo, 11.7% vs 13.3%; HR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.96; P=0.006) [4]. However, when the primary prevention and secondary prevention groups of patients were analyzed separately, reduction in MACE-4 was significant only in the primary prevention subgroup; HR 0.68 (95% CI, 0.53 to 0.87) and no longer significant in the larger secondary-prevention group; HR 0.91 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.01), Pinteraction = 0.03 [4]. In fact, the only significant interaction in the MACE-4 response to bempedoic acid was related to the baseline CV risk i.e. primary prevention versus secondary prevention status [4]. No significant interaction between the primary outcome and other given subgroup status (e.g. gender, BMI, baseline LDL-C and diabetes status) was demonstrated [4]. This finding was unexpected, particularly that number of CV events was 4.7 to 6.4-fold higher among patients with established CVD compared with those with only CV risk factors [4]. It should be emphasized that baseline values as well as and reductions in levels of LDL-C and C-reactive protein (CRP) by bempedoic acid were approximately the same in the primary and secondary prevention cohorts [4,5]. Therefore, differences in such levels between the primary and secondary cohorts could not explain the difference in outcomes. Compared to placebo, percentage reduction in LDL-C levels after 6 months and CRP were 21.1% (95% CI, 20.3 to 21.9) and 21.6% (95% CI, 19.6 to 2.37), respectively [4].
Effects of bempedoic acid on mortality
Sayed and Brophy [5] performed a post-hoc analysis of the overall and primary prevention reports of CLEAR-Outcomes trial to reconstruct data for the secondary prevention patients. These authors found that all-cause mortality was decreased by bempedoic acid in the primary prevention population by 30% (risk ratio 0.70; 95% credible interval 0.51 to 0.92) [5]. Conversely, in the secondary prevention cohort, there was trend towards increasing all-cause mortality by 15% (RR 1.15; 95% credible interval 0.99 to 1.33) [5]. Similar pattern was observed with respected to CV mortality, with a risk reduction of 42% in the primary prevention setting (RR 0.52, 95% credible interval 0.38 to 0.86) and 21% increased risk in the secondary prevention cohort (RR 1.21; 95% credible interval 1.00 to 1.45) [5]. Certainly, these mortality data in the secondary prevention cohort are disturbing and requires confirmation by further studies.
Separate analysis of the primary prevention cohort of the CLEAR Outcomes trial
The CLEAR Outcomes investigators conducted separate analysis of the primary prevention subgroup of patients (n=4,206) [6]. After a median follow-up of 39.9 months, the reduction in the primary outcome MACE-4 was statistically significant and was very close to that reported in the original trial with a HR of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.89; P=0.002) [4,6]. Furthermore, while no significant effects of bempedoic acid on mortality was shown in the whole CLEAR-Outcomes trial, in the primary prevention cohort, there were reductions in all-cause mortality (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.88) and CV mortality (HR 0.61; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.92) [6]. The report of the results of primary prevention data separately while not reporting corresponding data in the larger secondary prevention cohort raises an important question and concern. The most likely answer is that the Clear Outcomes investigators reported the more favorable results of bempedoic acid in the primary prevention cohort and did not like to reveal the less favorable, and possibly harmful results in the secondary prevention cohort [5].
Explanations of the discrepant effects of bempedoic acid in primary versus secondary prevention
There are several possible explanations for the less favorable CV effects of bempedoic acid in the secondary prevention patients. First, it may reflect a play of chance [7]. Second, as Alexander hypothesized, more benefit of bempedoic acid might be achieved in early stages of CVD [7]. Third, the more extensive use of CV protective drugs in the secondary prevention group potentially blunting any further benefit by bempedoic acid. Fourth, while patients’ characteristics of the secondary prevention cohort were not reported separately, there were some differences observed between characteristics of subjects included in the primary cohort versus the whole study population [4,6]. For instance, proportions of women and patients with diabetes were higher in the primary prevention cohort versus the whole patient population; 59% and 66% versus 48% and 45% [4,6]. However, as mentioned earlier, response to bempedoic acid did not change significantly by gender or diabetes status [4]. Therefore, to clarify the role of bempedoic acid in secondary prevention of CVD, a dedicated randomized trial should be conducted in patients with established CVD.
Subgroup analysis of the CLEAR Outcomes trial suggested a heterogeneity of bempodeic acid effect on CV events with substantial CV benefits in the primary prevention setting, but much less pronounced effects in the secondary prevention setting [4]. Moreover, subgroup analysis suggested a possible increase in overall and CV mortality in association with bempedoic acid in the secondary prevention patients [5]. However, results derived from subgroup analysis may be prone for multiple statistical limitations and should not be regarded as conclusive [8]. Therefore, to clarify the role of bempedoic acid in secondary prevention of CVD, a dedicated randomized trial should be conducted in patients with established CVD. In the meantime, the investigators of the CLEAR Outcomes trial should publish a separate analysis of the results in the secondary prevention cohort as they did regarding the primary prevention patients [6]. Based on available data, bempedoic acid may be used in patients with high CV risk and LDL-C levels above targets to decrease CV events and mortality (i.e in primary prevention of CVD). However, until more data becomes available, bempedoic acid should not be used in patients with established CVD due to possible increase in CV and all-cause mortality and its modest efficacy in decreasing CV events.
The author does not any conflict to declare.
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
