Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25993485›Full record

ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2015

One-year Mortality after an Acute Coronary Event and its Clinical Predictors: The ERICO Study.

Itamar Souza Santos, Alessandra Carvalho Goulart, Rodrigo Martins Brandão, Rafael Caire de Oliveira Santos, Márcio Sommer Bittencourt, Débora Sitnik, Alexandre Costa Pereira, Carlos Alberto Pastore, Nelson Samesima, Paulo Andrade Lotufo and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Modelling the cost-effectiveness of person-centred care for patients with acute coronary syndrome.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2020
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Cardiovascular Statistics - Brazil 2023.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Cardiovascular Statistics - Brazil 2021.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Cardiovascular Statistics - Brazil 2020.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2020
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Itamar Souza SantosFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, BR.
Alessandra Carvalho GoulartHospital Universitário, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, BR.
Rodrigo Martins BrandãoHospital Universitário, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, BR.
Rafael Caire de Oliveira SantosFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, BR.
Márcio Sommer BittencourtHospital Universitário, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, BR.
Débora SitnikHospital Universitário, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, BR.
Alexandre Costa PereiraInstituto do Coração, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, BR.
Carlos Alberto PastoreInstituto do Coração, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, BR.
Nelson SamesimaInstituto do Coração, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, BR.
Paulo Andrade LotufoFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, BR.
Isabela Martins BensenorFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, BR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInformation about post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) survival have been mostly short-term findings or based on specialized, cardiology referral centers.

objectivesTo describe one-year case-fatality rates in the Strategy of Registry of Acute Coronary Syndrome (ERICO) cohort, and to study baseline characteristics as predictors.

methodsWe analyzed data from 964 ERICO participants enrolled from February 2009 to December 2012. We assessed vital status by telephone contact and official death certificate searches. The cause of death was determined according to the official death certificates. We used log-rank tests to compare the probabilities of survival across subgroups. We built crude and adjusted (for age, sex and ACS subtype) Cox regression models to study if the ACS subtype or baseline characteristics were independent predictors of all-cause or cardiovascular mortality.

resultsWe identified 110 deaths in the cohort (case-fatality rate, 12.0%). Age [Hazard ratio (HR) = 2.04 per 10 year increase; 95% confidence interval (95%CI) = 1.75–2.38], non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (HR = 3.82 ; 95%CI = 2.21–6.60) or ST elevation myocardial infarction (HR = 2.59; 95%CI = 1.38–4.89) diagnoses, and diabetes (HR = 1.78; 95%CI = 1.20‑2.63) were significant risk factors for all-cause mortality in the adjusted models. We found similar results for cardiovascular mortality. A previous coronary artery disease diagnosis was also an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (HR = 1.61; 95%CI = 1.04–2.50), but not for cardiovascular mortality.

conclusionWe found an overall one-year mortality rate of 12.0% in a sample of post-ACS patients in a community, non-specialized hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. Age, ACS subtype, and diabetes were independent predictors of poor one‑year survival for overall and cardiovascular-related causes.

Indexed as

Acute Coronary SyndromeAgedAge FactorsBrazilDiabetes ComplicationsEpidemiologic MethodsFemaleHospitalizationHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRegistriesRisk FactorsSex Factors

Identifiers

PMID25993485
PMCPMC4523288

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.