ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2016
Influence of heart failure on the prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction in southwestern China.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- In-Hospital Mortality in Patients With Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction With or Without Mitral Regurgitation.Cureus · 2022Article
- Clinical pharmacist intervention reduces mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a propensity score matched analysis.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2019Article
- Inositol pyrophosphates mediated the apoptosis induced by hypoxic injury in bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells by autophagy.Stem cell research & therapy · 2019Article
- Hydrogen Sulfide Alleviates Acute Myocardial Ischemia Injury by Modulating Autophagy and Inflammation Response under Oxidative Stress.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The impact of heart failure (HF) on acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in patients from southwestern China remains unclear. The present study aimed to compare in-hospital cardiovascular events, mortality and clinical therapies in AMI patients with or without HF in southwestern China. In total, 591 patients with AMI hospitalized between February 2009 and December 2012 were examined; those with a history of HF were excluded. The patients were divided into four groups according to AMI type (ST-elevated or non-ST-elevated AMI) and the presence of HF during hospitalization. Clinical characteristics, in-hospital cardiovascular events, mortality, coronary angiography and treatment were compared. Clinical therapies, specifically evidence-based drug use were analyzed in patients with HF during hospitalization, including angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and β-blockers (BBs). AMI patients with HF had a higher frequency of co-morbidities, lower left ventricular ejection fraction, longer length of hospital stay and a greater risk of in-hospital mortality compared with AMI patients without HF. AMI patients with HF were less likely to be examined by cardiac angiography or treated with reperfusion therapy or recommended medications. AMI patients with HF co-treated with ACEIs and BBs had a significantly higher survival rate (94.4 vs. 67.5%; P<0.001) compared with untreated patients or patients treated with either ACEIs or BBs alone. Logistic regression analysis revealed that HF and cardiogenic shock in patients with AMI were the strongest predictors of in-hospital mortality. AMI patients with HF were at a higher risk of adverse outcomes. Cardiac angiography and timely standard recommended medications were associated with improved clinical outcomes.
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.