AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/JHV-2021/005
*Corresponding Author: James Elliott, Department of Vascular Surgery, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Queensland, Australia.
Citation: Elliott J., Lal V., McGahan T., Stacey L. BMaths (2021) Selection of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm for long distance inter-hospital transfer in Australia J, Heart and Vasculature 1(2); DOI: 10.31579/JHV-2021/005
Copyright: © 2021, James Elliott, 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: 01 March 2021 | Accepted: 10 March 2021 | Published: 08 April 2021
Keywords: ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm; surgery; surgical repair
Backgrounds: It is possible that a patient with Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (rAAA) who has features of critical illness, may receive a futile inter-hospital transfer for treatment in a tertiary centre. The goal of this study was to better identify patients who will benefit from transfer and surgery, so that these limited resources can be used effectively where needed.
Methods: All patients diagnosed with rAAA at this institution over a study period of 10 years were analysed. Data collection was conducted via a retrospective chart audit. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality for patients who undergo surgical repair.
Results: No evidence of an association between transferred and not transferred patient populations was found for the primary outcome of 30-Day mortality (p=0.94). There was slight evidence of an association between 30-Day mortality and transfer distance (p=0.048), with a higher frequency in those transferred less than 100km compared to those who travelled further (41% vs. 19%, respectively). Some evidence of an association was found for intervention type (p=0.038), with mortality in 37% of patients who had an open repair surgery, compared with 14% for patients who underwent EVAR surgery. There was also evidence of an association with an initial presentation of ALOC (p=0.005), and requiring inotropic/vasopressor support upon initial presentation (p=0.037).
Conclusions: Patient transfer from another hospital was not found to be associated with increased 30-day mortality. The data in this study supports the practice of offering treatment to patients with rAAA who are referred from distant (≥100km) locations.
This is a retrospective observational study of all patients diagnosed with rAAA at this institution from January 1st 2009 to Dec 31st 2018 (10 years). Inclusion criteria includes patients with a diagnosis of ruptured AAA clinically and/or radiologically or as a surgical finding within the specified date range. Exclusion criteria included patients with a non-ruptured, symptomatic or infected AAA. Patients who had a history of previous Abdominal Aortic intervention were also excluded.
Primary outcome is 30-day mortality. Other measures include patient age; gender; serum creatinine on first presentation; serum Hb on first presentation; transferred (transfer distance) or not transferred; surgical management of AAA or not (and if so, EVAR vs Open Surgical Repair); Any Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) measurement of <80mmHg; Altered level of consciousness (ALOC); presence of Hypothermia (temperature <35degrees Celsius); Transfusion of 4 or more units of Packed Red Blood Cells (PRBCs) pre-surgery; evidence of Myocardial Infarction (MI) pre-surgery; Inotropic/vasopressor support pre-surgery; post-op MI/CVA/Dialysis. The presence of shock was recorded. Shock was defined as the presence of any one of these pre-operative features: Any SBP readings <80mmHg, ALOC at initial presentation, Transfusion of at least 4 units of PRBCs, Inotropic support. The subsequent Glasgow Aneurysm Score was calculated for each patient.
Associations between patient groups of interest and categorical patient characteristics, in the populations of interest, were examined using χ2 tests of independence or the Fisher’s exact test, where more than 20% of the expected values were less than five. Associations between patient groups of interest and continuous patient characteristics were examined using a two-sample t-test. Categorical patient characteristics were summarised by frequency and percentage and continuous patient characteristics were summarised by mean and standard deviation (SD). Statistical analyses were performed in Stata version 15 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, U.S.A.).
The receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) curve with the Youden index was used to determine which Glasgow aneurysm score (GAS) cut-off was predictive of postoperative mortality. Logistic regression was used to investigate the association of GAS to 30-day mortality, at the 5% significance level. Statistical analyses were performed in Stata version 15 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, U.S.A.). Logistic regression was used to investigate the association between year (as a continuous predictor) and use of EVAR surgery, at the 5% significance level. Statistical analyses were performed in Stata version 15 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, U.S.A.).
Approval for the conduct of this study has been granted by the Metro South Hospital and Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki.
A total of 158 patients met inclusion. 79 patients (50%) had their initial presentation to the tertiary hospital, 79 patients (50%) were transferred to the tertiary hospital from a smaller institution without a dedicated Vascular Surgery unit. A total of 109 patients proceeded to surgery (87 underwent open repair, 22 underwent EVAR) (see table 1). The patients that met inclusion were then further divided into 3 surgical groups: those who presented locally (n=41), those who were transferred <100km from another institution (n=41), and those who were transferred ≥100km (n=27) from another institution. No evidence of an association with markers of pre-operative critical illness, GAS or shock, between these groups was found.
Amongst all patients who proceeded to surgery, there was a higher proportion in the transferred group who required inotropic support compared to the non-transferred group (62% vs. 41%, respectively; p=0.039). A larger proportion of patients (81%) in the ≥100km transfer distance group required transfusion of 4 or more units of PRBCs than in the <100km transfer distance group (59%) (p=0.048, table 2).
Of all patients undergoing surgery, 11 patients (11.2%) had a post-operative Myocardial Infarction (MI), 6 patients (6.3%) suffered post-operative Stroke/Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA), 15 patients (15.3%)
required post-operative haemodialysis/renal replacement therapy. Post-operative complications were not associated with inter-hospital transfer (see table 3).
In patients who proceeded to surgery, no evidence of an association between transferred (regardless of distance) and non-transferred patient populations was found for the primary outcome of 30-Day mortality (p=0.94) with mortality for 32% and 38% of patients in each transferred and non-transferred group, respectively. There was slight evidence of an association between 30-Day mortality and transfer distance (p=0.048) (see table 4), with a higher frequency in those transferred less than 100km compared to those who travelled further (41% vs. 19%, respectively). Some evidence of an association was found for intervention type (p=0.038), with mortality in 37% of patients who had an open repair surgery, compared to 14% for patients who had EVAR surgery.
Open Repair vs EVAR was evaluated, as there were lower rates of EVAR than expected. Table 5 presents the number and percentage of the surgical intervention types for each year. A total of 87 Open repair and 22 EVAR surgeries were performed. Table 6 presents the logistic regression model for year as a predictor of EVAR surgery use, the model does not suggest evidence of a statistically significant association (OR 1.15, 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.36; p=0.101. Figure 1 provides the average predicated probability of EVAR surgery use over the ten year period. Although a trend can be noted in increasing probability, the large confidence intervals for each year, for which the predicted probabilities overlap across all years, highlight the insufficient evidence for a statistically significant relationship.
Evidence of associations with increased mortality rate were found with presentations that included ALOC (50% vs. 23% p=0.005) and requiring inotropic/vasopressor support (41% vs. 22%, p=0.037). The GAS Score was found to be strongly associated with mortality (p=0.004) in this study. Table 7 presents the logistic regression model for GAS score as a risk factor for post-operative mortality. There was strong evidence to suggest that the odds of post-operative mortality increased by a factor of 1.56 for each 10-unit increase in GAS score (95% CI: CI: 1.14 – 2.13, p=0.006). ROC curves showed the optimum GAS score cut-off was 95, at which the correct classification rate was maximised with a sensitivity of 80.0%, specificity of 56.1% and an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.68 (95% CI: 0.56 – 0.79), as shown in Figure 2. Patients in the study population with a GAS score lower or equal to 95 had a mortality of 13% (6/47), compared with 43% (24/56) for a higher score (p=0.001).
68/79 (86.1%) of those who were transferred had surgery vs 41/79 (51.9%) of those who presented directly to this institution. Operative mortality overall was 35/109 (32%). Operative mortality in those presenting locally was 13/41(38%). Operative mortality in those transferred any distance was 22/68 (32%) with those transferred <100km 17/41(41%) and >100km 5/27(19%) (p= 0.048).
Those not offered surgical intervention were much older (mean age 81.7) and more likely to be female (41% vs 10%) (See table 8). They had higher proportions of pre-existing cerebrovascular disease (23% vs 10%) and renal impairment (23% vs 14%). No formal comparisons have been made from this group as the study did not capture patients from regional hospital who could have been transferred but were not. The possible reasons for not transferred include: surgery/transfer not requested by the regional hospital/patient/family, proceeding to surgical repair locally, or this institution’s vascular team advising that transfer appeared to be futile based on known clinical factors.
A negative disease status for either renal, cardiovascular or myocardial disease, was assigned across 17 patients (11%). The largest frequency of missing data was for initial creatinine levels, with 15 patients missing data and having no previous indication of renal impairment. Pre-existing conditions were also missing for two additional participants. GAS scores were not calculated for these 17 patients. Missing data was also encountered in the recording of post-operative complications for which approximately 10% had missing data. Sample sizes have been reported in tables for all variables where any frequencies of missing data was an issue. All missing data in this study is believed to be missing at random (MAR) as patients with missing data were distributed across all subgroups.
Patient transfer itself was not found to be associated with 30-Day mortality in those who underwent surgical intervention. However, if the patient is transferred from ≥100km away and proceeds to surgery, they appeared to have a lower 30-day mortality rate compared with other interhospital transfers. It’s possible that these patients have more physiological reserve as those transferred further displayed increased proportions of a marker of being critically unwell. This study supports the practice of offering interhospital transfer to patients who are referred from long distances (who are not obviously too frail or receiving CPR for example) with rAAA as they may have a favourable survival rate despite high rates of requiring massive transfusion and/or receiving inotropic support. These results may be influenced to some degree by an underlying data sampling bias, due to an unknown number of patients who were not transferred from peripheral institutions.
Presentations of rAAA associated with ALOC and/or requiring Inotropic/vasopressor support were associated with higher 30-day mortality rates. Both of these are indicative of shock, and reflect a higher GAS score. Further to this, in this study, those with higher GAS scores had higher mortality rates. Its use as an adjunctive scoring system is supported by this study, but it should not be relied solely as a decision-making tool given the range of other individual patient factors that are shown to be significant in this study including operative technique and interhospital transfer distance. Denying potentially lifesaving treatment to a patient because of a scoring system alone would be controversial, particularly given previous attempts to apply a cut-off value (i.e. a score of 84) would effectively deny life-saving treatment to a proportion of survivors (35%) who have a pre-operative score above that threshold19. Though that study did not specifically explain which method they used to calculate their cut-off value, we attempted our own investigation of optimal GAS score optimal cut-off value calculation and found that in this cohort a score of 95 could more accurately predict mortality, and promote the offering of interhospital transfer and possible surgery to a larger proportion of patients with rAAA. Neither are perfect on their own. The GAS may be useful, for example, in providing patients and their families with further specific information if the pursuit of non-operative/palliative measures were being considered and some operative mortality risk rates were being sought. The slightly higher “cut-off score” to help guide decision making with intervention suggested by the analysis in this study may reflect differences in how the scores were analysed (as mentioned above). Alternatively it could also reflect other improvements in care. Other institutions are encouraged to measure their recent outcomes using GAS as part of any audit of their surgical activity.
This study also showed a significant reduction in 30-day mortality for EVAR compared with Open repair for rAAA in patients who are deemed suitable candidates for this approach. Patients who underwent EVAR in this cohort, however, all underwent pre-operative CT-Angiography, indicating a degree of relative haemodynamic stability. Open Repair (rather than EVAR) was more commonly utilised in this study, and its ongoing use in rAAA is supported by the relatively superior 30-day mortality rate (37%) in this study when compared with other published rates for Open repair for rAAA from larger cohort studies1-2,6. The rates of EVAR for rAAA at this institution are increasing based on the analysis performed in this study and this may reflect firstly that this unit’s first hybrid theatre was opened near the start of this study 10 year period. Furthermore, the mix of the surgeons working within the unit included a range of individual surgeon preferences for modality of treatment of rAAA and decisions are based on individualised patient parameters on arrival. But over time there has been increased experience with EVAR as a modality of treatment in the rAAA setting.
There was a major limitation in this study in that patients who were not transferred were not captured. Open repair (rather than EVAR) and initial presentations including ALOC and/or Inotropic/vasopressor support were found to be strongly associated with 30-Day mortality. Open repair was by far the most common modality of surgical treatment, and still has its place in the treatment of this lethal condition. Shorter transfer distance appears to have an increased 30-day mortality risk in patients undergoing surgery, and this may reflect data sampling bias and/or could reflect a more robust group of patients who present with rAAA from a more distant location. Alternatively, it could represent an increased propensity to offer emergency surgery to critically unwell patients who had transferred relatively shorter distances. The data in this study supports the practice of offering selective transfer for potential treatment to patients with rAAA who are referred from distant (≥100km) locations, bearing in mind that the patients captured in this study are those who were referred to, accepted by, and successfully arrived at this institution.
A multicentre study of critically unwell patients with rAAA undergoing interhospital transfer in Australia would add value to defining the current logistical challenge this country faces. Any future study in this manner should include data from ambulance services, death certificates and regional centres to more accurately measure the incidence, prevalence, and effects of the illness and its treatment in different locations of Australia in order to better implement effective services to the community.
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.
