AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article
*Corresponding Author: A.J.J. IJsselmuiden, Department of Cardiology, Amphia Hospital Mailbox 90158 4800 RK Breda the Netherlands.
Citation: Zwaan EM, Cheung ES, Simsek C, Kofflard MJM, Holtzer CAJ, Schölzel B, Meuwissen M, IJsselmuiden AJJ. (2021) Performance Analysis of a Novel Hydrophilic-Coated Transradial Guiding Catheter. J. Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, 4(4); Doi:10.31579/2641-0419/128
Copyright: © 2021 A.J.J. IJsselmuiden, 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: 12 January 2021 | Accepted: 28 January 2021 | Published: 18 February 2021
Keywords: catheterization; complication; coronary disease; hydrophilic-coated guiding catheter; TR-PCI
Aim: The transradial approach (TRA) has taken an upswing, however access-site complications still exist. The choice of potentially less traumatic materials may minimize these complications. This article describes the use of a hydrophilic-coated 6F guiding catheter for diagnostic and interventional procedures and upper extremity dysfunction following these procedures.
Materials and Methods: This prospective observational study enrolled 217 patients who underwent elective transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (TR-PCI) for stable and unstable angina, or acute coronary syndrome between May 2014 and November 2016. All patients were treated using a 6F hydrophilic-coated guiding catheter (PRIMUM, PendraCare, Wellinq, the Netherlands). Catheter performance was assessed on a five-point scale ranging from very bad to very good. Procedure safety was assessed using the Major cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) criteria.
Results: The average number of guiding catheters used was 1.2 per patient. Overall performance of the catheters was rated Average/Good. Procedural success, defined as TIMI grade 3 flow and successful stent deployment, with a residual diameter stenosis of <25%, was 97.7%. MACCE occurred in 1.5% during the 6-months of follow-up.
Conclusion: These data indicate that the use of a hydrophilic-coated guiding catheter to perform percutaneous coronary interventions is safe and effective, with high procedural success and low complication rates. In addition, the short and long-term MACCE outcomes of the PCI were favorable.
Running title: Guiding Catheter Performance
ACC/AHA : American College of Cardiology/American Heart
Association classification
CAG : Coronary artery angiography
MACCE : Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events
NRSP : Numeric Rating Scale for Pain
NSTEMI : Non ST-elevation myocardial infarction
PCI : Percutaneous coronary intervention
RAO : Radial artery occlusion
RAS : Radial artery stenosis
STEMI : ST-elevation myocardial infarction
TIMI : Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction
TRA :Transradial approach
TR-PCI :Transradial percutaneous coronary intervention
6F :6 French
Throughout the years, transradial approach (TRA) has become the standard access site during coronary interventions. The major factors contributing to this are the occurrence of less vascular site complications, enhanced patient comfort, less hospital days and therefore reduced cost [1,2]. Nevertheless, TRA is still associated with certain complications such as local access bleeding, radial/brachial artery spasm and forearm hematoma, which may result in upper extremity dysfunction [3-5]. The usage ofhydrophilic-coated guiding catheters provide smooth catheter introduction with low friction during advancement, even in tortuous or calcified vessels. The hydrophilic coating reduces vessel spasm and is expected to be less traumatic to the vessel wall. [6-8] Moreover, hydrophilic guiding catheters are less trombogenic than their non-hydrophilic counterparts. [9] A performance analysis of a 6 French (6F) hydrophilic-coated guiding catheter (PRIMUM, PendraCare, Wellinq, the Netherlands) was done in a subset of patients included in the ARCUS registry (Effects of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention on upper extremity function). [3] The aim of the study was to assess whether the usage of hydrophilic coated guiding catheters is safe and effective, and whether it could lead to favorable outcomes with TRA.
Materials and methods
Between May 2014 and November 2016, five interventional cardiologists kept record of the guiding catheter performance during transradial procedures. All patients enrolled in this registry were included in the ARCUS (Effects of trAnsRadial perCUtaneouS coronary intervention on upper extremity function), a study performed in a high-volume secondary referral center in the Netherlands. [3] For the ARCUS study, a total sample size of 400 transradial and 100 transfemoral patients was chosen, based on an expected upper extremity dysfunction rate of 30%. [3] Patients were included in the ARCUS study, if they had a palpable radial artery, and if Doppler ultrasound examination confirmed a non-occluded flow. Procedures using the contralateral radial artery or femoral artery after previous unsuccessful attempts were also included in this study. Exclusion criteria were 1) absence of informed consent 2) an occluded flow of the radial artery objectified by Doppler ultrasound 3) incapability to accomplish measurements due to comorbidities and 4) illiteracy. [3] For this sub-study, only patients treated with transradial PCI (TR-PCI) between May 2014 and November 2016 were included and patients were excluded from this analysis if they had a crossover procedure to the contralateral or femoral approach due to failure of the TRA or if there was no complete record of the hydrophilic-coated guiding catheter performance.
Guiding Catheter design
The hydrophilic-coated segment of the PRIMUM-catheter is approximately 7 cm proximal from the tip until 25 cm distal from the hub. [10] To facilitate optimal alignment and backup support the segment in the tip is uncoated. The proximal 25 cm of the catheter that stays outside the body is uncoated to ease manipulation, while the uncoated catheter segment in the valve of the sheath is designed to prevent unintentional movement of the catheter during the procedure. Hydrophilic coating provides no “stick-slip” effect, allowing more accurate and precise tip positioning in ostial lesions, and a 1:1 torque control of the tip. While the outer diameter is downsized compared to a 7 French catheter, the catheter’s large inner lumen (0.071”) allows good contrast injection even while performing the kissing balloon technique, and offers expanded device compatibility for larger profile devices. [10] The catheter has a small a-traumatic soft tip to minimize vessel damage.
Percutaneous Coronary Interventions
A hydrophilic-coated 6F sheath introducer (Glidesheath slender, Terumo Medical Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) [10], was attempted in all patients undergoing TR-PCI. [3] A 0.014-inch coronary guidewire was used to cross target lesions and contrast was injected manually in all cases. Non-patent hemostasis of the radial artery was achieved by using a compression device (Terumo Medical Corporation, Tokyo, Japan).
The primary endpoint of this registry was procedural success, defined as thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) coronary flow grade 3, and successful stent deployment, with an angiographic visual estimated final residual diameter stenosis of <25%. [11] Secondary endpoints were guiding catheter safety (rate of catheter-related complications).
Guiding catheter performance characteristics
Guiding catheter insertion, torque control, opacification of the vessel, tip and catheter radiopacity, back-up support, and persistent catheter stiffness was rated by experienced operators on a five-point scale (1: Very Bad; 2: Bad; 3: Average; 4: Good; 5: Very Good). Furthermore, friction in and outside the sheath, the occurrence of kinking, the need for a guide liner or for deep intubation, vessel damage, guiding cannulation failure, and defective catheter were recorded. Back-up support was defined as the ability to advance a guiding catheter in coronary vessels conveniently, represented by the efficacy of transfer or the proximally applied push force to the catheter tip.
Torqueability was defined as the capacity of a guiding catheter to tolerate torque between the proximal hub and the tip without kinking or other irreversible damage to the system. Friction was defined as a contact force accumulated when two surfaces (i.e. sheath vs. guiding catheter or guiding catheter vs. vessel wall) interact and which can affect advancement/movement of the catheter tip (e.g. resistance).
Kinking of the catheter was defined as a visually observed in vivo indentation of one side of the catheter wall touching the opposite side of the catheter wall with a sharp curvature. Catheter stiffness was defined as the force needed to bend the wire. Overall guiding catheter performance was scored on a five-point scale by the operators.
Catheter induced pain and spasm
Procedural pain was assessed using the validated Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NPRS). [12] Procedural radial artery spasm was also evaluated. Moderate spasm was defined as some resistance perceived by the operator, while the catheter still is effectively maneuverable, and distinct painful perception for the patient. Severe spasm was defined as catheter not steerable or retractable, with severe pain for the patient when the catheter was being manipulated.
Access-site complications
Access-site complications were noted during the procedure and clinical outpatient visits (after two weeks, one month and six months of follow-up) and when necessary patients were referred to a hand specialist. [3] Swelling, access-site bleeding, hematomas and their proportions were assessed. Furthermore, upper extremity function as a composite endpoint consisting of (isometric) strength, sensibility of all digits, and circumference measurements was also assessed.
Measures of long-term clinical outcome
All patients were interviewed personally and examined at their outpatient clinical visit up to approximately six months after their catheterization, to assess the long-term TR-PCI treatment outcomes and also specifically the complications involving the hand intervention. Long-clinical outcomes were measured in terms of Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) defined as myocardial infarction, according to the Third Universal definition of Myocardial Infarction, target vessel revascularization, either by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting, death from any cause or a cerebrovascular accident. [13]
Descriptive statistics were provided for all variables considered in the analysis. For categorical variables, the data was presented as percentages. Continuous variables with normal distribution were presented using means and standard deviation (SD), non-normally distributed variables were presented using median and interquartile (IQR)-range. Between-group differences of dichotomous/ordinal variables were analyzed using Chi-square test with Yates continuity correction or for trend, respectively. Comparisons of continuous variables for more than two groups were analyzed using the Kruskal Wallis test. Statistical tests were carried out two-tailed at the 5% level of significance. Statistical analyses were performed with SPSS for Mac version 26.
A total of 234 patients treated with TR-PCI were included in the ARCUS study between May 2014 and November 2016. Seventeen (7.2%) patients were excluded from this registry because of crossover to the femoral or contralateral radial artery. In all these patients access to the radial artery was unsuccessful and crossover was not related to the performance of the guiding catheter.
The demographic and baseline characteristics of the total patient population (N =217) in this registry are presented in Table 1.
The mean age was 64.9 ± 11 years and 176 patients (81.1%) were male. Procedural characteristics and PCI complexity are summarized in Table 2.
Among the 217 included patients, 116 patients underwent treatment of a single lesion, 76 patients had two lesions, 22 patients had three lesions, two patients had four lesions, and one patient had five lesions treated. The procedural characteristics and outcomes are listed in Table 3.
The average number of guiding catheters was 1.2 per patient. During 176 procedures, one type of guiding catheter shape was used. In respectively 35, five and one procedure there were two, three or four different catheter shapes used. Procedure success rate was 97.7%. Guiding cannulation failure resulted in procedural failure in five (2.3%) patients, in which nine guiding catheters in total were used. The reasons of guiding cannulation failure were wrong sizing (N=1) and severe calcifications, such as chronic total occlusions, whereupon the guiding catheter could not be advanced (N=4).
The guiding catheter performance as was reported by an opinion survey among the operators is listed in Table 4. The handling of the PRIMUM guiding catheter was rated Good-Average as it enhances good insertion control, exhibits good torque response, and effective back-up support, enabling adequate wiring, minimal guiding switches and sufficient equipment delivery. Operators considered the vessel visualization good, however, the visualization of the catheter tip was rated Bad-Average, although manageable by using a gentle puff of contrast, without affecting the procedure or its outcome.
The lowest scores was Average for the performance of the Judkins Left and Tiger (TIG) guiding catheter (Table 4).Friction during passage of the stent through the guiding catheter was reported in 4.9%, while friction outside the sheath was reported in 6.1% (Table 4).
Procedural complications
Dissection occurred in two patients during balloon dilatation. Both were adequately treated with stents (Table 4). Radial artery spasm was reported in 23 patients (10.6%), ranging from moderate spasm (N=19, 8.8%) to severe spasm (N= 4, 1.9%). All spasms were alleviated during the procedure and there was no patient injury reported (Table 5).
Chi-square test for trend indicated there was only a significant difference in spasms between gender groups, in favor of male patients, c2(2) =7.54, p=0.023. A Kruskal-Wallis Test revealed no statistically difference in body mass index across the three spasm severities (no spasm, N=192, moderate spasm, N= 19, severe spasm, N=4), c2 (2,N=215)=2.85, p=0.240.
MACCE during follow-up
Major events during follow-up were scarce, with a mean follow-up period
of 182 ±36 days. At two weeks after the procedure one patient, who presented with progressive angina, had a revascularization by means of PCI.
Furthermore, one patient had a successful resuscitation after a ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) followed by a coronary angiography, but there were no signs of stent thrombosis or significant coronary stenosis. One month after the procedure one patient underwent a PCI due to stent thrombosis. One patient required a semi-urgent coronary artery bypass grafting at six months due to stent thrombosis. No cerebral complications occurred during the study.
Post-procedural Access-site complications
The access-site complications and hand dysfunction are presented in Table 5. Noteworthy are the radial artery occlusions, which recanalized in 50%. Of this cohort 22 patients were referred to a hand rehabilitation specialist during the 6-month follow-up period.
This article presents to the best of our knowledge the first prospective registry regarding the performance and procedural results of a hydrophilic-coated guiding catheter in TR-PCI. This article is also the first comprehensive evaluation regarding access-site complications post TR-PCI using a novel hydrophilic-coated guiding catheter.
Theoretical advantage of the PRIMUM configuration is the catheter introduction with less friction during advancement due to the hydrophilic coating. With regard to improving catheter tip visualization new developments are ongoing.
This study reports the overall performance and safety of the catheter up to six months of follow-up. There have been concerns regarding long-term safety of hydrophilic-coated guiding catheters regarding distal embolic events. [14-16] However, these studies only provide low-level evidence and evidence from large-scale human trials are lacking.
Guiding catheter related dissection in TR-PCI was reported in 0.9%, compared to 2.2% in similar studies using an uncoated catheter. [17] Hydrophilic coatings on introducer sheaths reduce rates of radial spasms. [18] A hydrophilic coating on guiding catheters may contribute to reduce this rate even further. Radial artery spasm has been reported to be responsible for up to 38% of all transradial procedure failures. [19] In our study, spasm in the radial artery was reported as “Moderate” in 8.8%, and only “Severe” in 1.8%, which is far better in comparison with the moderate to severe spasm rate of 19% when using only 6F hydrophilic-coated sheaths. [17] Additionally, current rates are comparable with previously reported symptomatic radial artery spasm of 0.7% while using the sheathless Eaucath hydrophilic-coated 6F guiding catheter. [1] Procedural failure in our cohort was not attributed to spasm.
Upper extremity function assessment showed high rates of dysfunction as it is a very sensitive composite endpoint. [5] Upper extremity function following TR-PCI has never been examined, as thoroughly as in our study, therefore we cannot compare our outcomes with the existing literaturse. Although we did not compare the hydrophilic-coated catheter to an uncoated catheter, hydrophilic coating might limit upper extremity dysfunction following TR-PCI. Future research is needed and should focus on comparing hydrophilic vs. uncoated catheters in relation to upper extremity function in order to optimize TR-PCI and minimize access-site related complications. We believe that the current report can be used as a tool for comparison with other novel guiding catheters (e.g. Railway Cordis Sheathless).
Procedural complications and long-term clinical outcomes were similar to previous studies. [19] Overall, the patient characteristics of our cohort, with amongst others 73% B/C lesions, were comparable to the general population. These results may therefore also be applicable to a general patient population undergoing TR-PCI.
This registry was a prospective multicenter non-randomized registry. Patients were selected from the ARCUS trial when operators had completely filled out the catheter performance survey and procedural data was complete, which might cause selection bias, as this was not randomly achieved. Nevertheless, the data on upper extremity dysfunction represent objective measurements and reflect a higher level of evidence. The main limitation of this study is that there was no comparison with other, uncoated 6F guiding catheters or with sheathless interventions. A conclusion on the effect of hydrophilic coatings on upper extremity function could therefore not be drawn and should be a focus point for future research. Randomized studies are warranted.
In conclusion, this registry indicates the 6F PRIMUM guiding catheter to show high eligibility for use in TR-PCI. Use of the hydrophilic-coated PRIMUM catheter as a default system in routine TR-PCI was both feasible and safe, associated with high procedural success and a low complication rate. In addition, it showed favorable short and long-term MACCE outcomes. This report could serve as a tool for comparing the performance of different (novel) guiding catheters in the future.
Conflict of Interest:
The authors have no financial relationships or conflicts of interest to disclose regarding the contents of this article
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
