Trial reportClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2017
Drop-out from cardiovascular magnetic resonance in a randomized controlled trial of ST-elevation myocardial infarction does not cause selection bias on endpoints.
Trial report in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Two-year follow-up of 4 months metformin treatment vs. placebo in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: data from the GIPS-III RCT.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2017Trial
- Symmetric dimethylarginine (SDMA) outperforms asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) and other methylarginines as predictor of renal and cardiovascular outcome in non-dialysis chronic kidney disease.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe extent of selection bias due to drop-out in clinical trials of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) as surrogate endpoints is unknown. We sought to interrogate the characteristics and prognosis of patients who dropped out before acute CMR assessment compared to CMR-participants in a previously published double-blinded, placebo-controlled all-comer trial with CMR outcome as the primary endpoint.
methodsBaseline characteristics and composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, heart failure and re-infarction after 30 days and 5 years of follow-up were assessed and compared between CMR-drop-outs and CMR-participants using the trial screening log and the Eastern Danish Heart Registry.
resultsThe drop-out rate from acute CMR was 28% (n = 92). These patients had a significantly worse clinical risk profile upon admission as evaluated by the TIMI-risk score (3.7 (± 2.1) vs 4.0 (± 2.6), p = 0.043) and by left ventricular ejection fraction (43 (± 9) vs. 47 (± 10), p = 0.029). CMR drop-outs had a higher incidence of known hypertension (39% vs. 35%, p = 0.043), known diabetes (14% vs. 7%, p = 0.025), known cardiac disease (11% vs. 3%, p = 0.013) and known renal function disease (5% vs. 0%, p = 0.007). However, the 30-day and 5-years composite endpoint rate was not significantly higher among the CMR drop-out ((HR 1.43 (95%-CI 0.5; 3.97) (p = 0.5)) and (HR 1.31 (95%-CI 0.84; 2.05) (p = 0.24)).
conclusionCMR-drop-outs had a higher incidence of cardiovascular risk factors at baseline, a worse clinical risk profile upon admission. However, no significant difference was observed in the clinical endpoints between the groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28168513What 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.