[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 498
Citations 0
Correction
September 1, 2020

Errors in the Text

JAMA Intern Med. Published online September 1, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.5608

In the Editorial titled “Multivessel or Culprit Vessel–Only Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock: Real-World Evidence in Support of CULPRIT-SHOCK,”1 published online August 24, 2020, there were 2 errors in the third paragraph. First, CULPRIT-SHOCK found “that culprit vessel–only stenting in patients who are clinically unstable was associated with an 8.3% absolute decrease in 30-day mortality compared with multivessel PCI,” not culprit vessel–only PCI. Second, in the last sentence of the third paragraph, “patients and cardiogenic shock and AMI” should have been “patients with cardiogenic shock and AMI.” This article has been corrected online.

References
1.
DeJong  C, Redberg  RF.  Multivessel or culprit vessel–only percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: real-world evidence in support of CULPRIT-SHOCK.   JAMA Intern Med. Published online August 24, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.3400Google Scholar
×