ArticleThe American journal of cardiology2017
Preinfarct Health Status and the Use of Early Invasive Versus Ischemia-Guided Management in Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome.
Article in The American journal of cardiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Early invasive management improves outcomes in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). The association between preinfarct health status and the selecting patients for early invasive management is unknown. The Prospective Registry Evaluating outcomes after Myocardial Infarctions: Events and Recovery and Translational Research Investigating Underlying disparities in acute Myocardial infarction Patients' Health status are consecutive US multicenter registries, in which the associations between preinfarct angina frequency and quality of life (both assessed by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire on admission) and the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score and referral to early invasive management (coronary angiography within 48 hours) were evaluated using Poisson regression, after adjusting for site, demographics, and clinical and psychosocial variables. Of 3,768 patients with NSTEMI, 2,182 (57.9%) patients were referred for early invasive treatment. Patients with excellent, good, or very good baseline angina-specific quality of life, respectively, were more likely to receive early angiography, even after adjustment, as compared with patients reporting poor baseline quality of life because of angina (62.1.0%, 60.9%, 59.6%, vs 51.2%; adjusted relative risk [RR] = 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04 to 1.16; RR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.27; RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.31, respectively). Finally, patients with a GRACE score in the highest risk decile (199.5 to <321.4) had significantly lower rates of early invasive treatment (42.7%) than patients in the lowest decile of risk (67.6%; adjusted RR for continuous GRACE score per SD [1 SD = 40 points], 0.96, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.99, p = 0.019). In conclusion, in this real-world NSTEMI cohort, patients with the highest mortality risk and worst health status were less likely to be referred for early invasive management. Further work is needed to understand the role of preinfarct health status and in-hospital treatment strategy.
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.