ArticleYonsei medical journal2014
Performance of reperfusion therapy and hospital mortality in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with non-chest pain complaints.
Article in Yonsei medical journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Symptomology, Outcomes and Risk Factors of Acute Coronary Syndrome Presentations without Cardiac Chest Pain: A Scoping Review.European cardiology · 2024Article
- Comparison of the predictive value of four-dimensional speckle tracking imaging risk classification and the TIMI system after STEMI reperfusion therapy.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2018Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients may visit the emergency department (ED) complaining of sensations of pain other than the chest. We investigated our performance of reperfusion therapy for STEMI patients presenting with non-chest pains. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a retrospective observational cohort study. STEMI patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were divided into a chest pain group and a non-chest pain group. Clinical differences between the two groups and the influence of presenting with non-chest pains on door-to-electrocardiograms (ECG) time, door-to-balloon time, and hospital mortality were evaluated.
resultsOf the 513 patients diagnosed with STEMI, 93 patients presented with non-chest pains. Patients in the non-chest pain group were older, more often female, and had a longer symptom onset to ED arrival time and higher Killip class than patients in the chest pain group. There was a statistically significant delay in door-to-ECG time (median, 2.0 min vs. 5.0 min; p<0.001) and door-to-balloon time (median, 57.5 min vs. 65.0 min; p<0.001) in patients without chest pain. In multivariate analysis, presenting with non-chest pains was an independent predictor for hospital mortality (odds ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-4.7). However, door-to-ECG time and door-to-balloon time were not factors related to hospital mortality.
conclusionSTEMI patients presenting without chest pain showed higher baseline risk and hospital mortality than patients presenting with chest pain. ECG acquisition and primary PCI was delayed for patients presenting with non-chest pains, but not influencing hospital mortality. Efforts to reduce pre-hospital time delay for these patients are necessary.
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.