ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2012
Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging findings in non-ST-segment elevation versus ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing early invasive intervention.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Effects of high-dose atorvastatin pretreatment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a cardiac magnetic resonance study.Journal of Korean medical science · 2015Trial
- Evaluating the optimal timing of revascularisation in patients with transient ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the TRANSIENT Trial.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2014Trial
- Angiographic validation of magnetic resonance assessment of myocardium at risk in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2013Trial
- Trial
- A systematic review and meta-analyses of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in acute myocardial infarction.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2026Review
- Prognostic Value of Psoas Muscle Mass Index in Patients With Non‒ST-Segment‒Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Prospective Observational Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020Observational
- Differences in symptoms and pre-hospital delay among acute myocardial infarction patients according to ST-segment elevation on electrocardiogram: an analysis of China Acute Myocardial Infarction (CAMI) registry.Chinese medical journal · 2019Article
- Metabolomic Profiling in Acute ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Identifies Succinate as an Early Marker of Human Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2018Article
- Microvascular obstruction in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance study.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2014Article
- Imaging the myocardial microcirculation post-myocardial infarction.Current heart failure reports · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To define causes and pathological mechanisms underlying differences in clinical outcomes, we compared the findings of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) between ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). In 168 patients undergoing early invasive intervention for STEMI (n = 113) and NSTEMI (n = 55), CE-MRI was performed a median of 6 days after the index event. Infarct size was measured on delayed-enhancement imaging, and area at risk (AAR) was quantified on T2-weighted images. The median infarct size was significantly smaller in the NSTEMI group than in the STEMI group (10.7% [5.6-18.1] vs. 19.2% [10.3-30.7], P < 0.001). Although there was a trend toward a greater myocardial salvage index ([AAR - infarct size] × 100/AAR) in the NSTEMI group compared to the STEMI group (48.2 [30.4-66.8] vs. 40.5 [24.8-53.5], P = 0.056), myocardial salvage index was similar between the groups in patients with anterior infarction (39.6 [20.0-54.9] vs. 35.5 [23.2-53.4], P = 0.96). The NSTEMI group also had a significantly lower extent of microvascular obstruction and a smaller number of segments with >75% of infarct transmurality relative to the STEMI group (0% [0-0.6] vs. 0.9% [0-2.3], P < 0.001 and 3.0 ± 2.3 vs. 4.6 ± 2.9, P = 0.001, respectively). Myocardial hemorrhage was detected less frequently in the NSTEMI group than the STEMI group (22.6% vs. 43.8%, P = 0.029). In the multivariate analysis, baseline Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow grade 3 and hemorrhagic infarction were closely associated with ST-segment elevation (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13-0.81, P = 0.017; OR 5.66, 95% CI 1.77-18.12, P = 0.003, respectively). In conclusion, in vivo pathophysiological differences revealed by CE-MRI assessment include more favorable infarct size, AAR, myocardial salvage and reperfusion injury in patients with NSTEMI compared to those with STEMI undergoing early invasive intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.