ArticleZdravstveno varstvo2017
Clinical Profile and Management of Patients with Incident and Recurrent Acute Myocardial Infarction in Albania - a Call for More Focus on Prevention Strategies.
Article in Zdravstveno varstvo, 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.
- Article
- Identification of key genes involved in myocardial infarction.European journal of medical research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe clinical profile of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients reflects the burden of risk factors in the general population. Differences between incident (first) and recurrent (repeated) events and their impact on treatment are poorly described. We studied potential differences in the clinical profile and in-hospital treatment between patients hospitalised with an incident and recurrent AMI.
methodsA total of 324 patients admitted in the Coronary Care Unit of 'Mother Teresa' hospital, Tirana, Albania (2013-2014), were included in the study. Information on AMI type, complications and risk factors was obtained from patient's medical file. Logistic regression analyses were used to explore differences between the incident and recurrent AMIs regarding clinical profile and in-hospital treatment.
resultsOf all patients, 50 (15.4%) had a prior AMI. Compared to incident cases, recurrent cases were older (P=0.01), more often women (P=0.01), less educated (P=0.01), and smoked less (P=0.03). Recurrent cases experienced more often heart failure (HF) (OR=2.48; 95% CI: 1.31-4.70), impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (OR=1.97; 95% CI:1.05-3.71), and multivessel disease (OR=6.32; 95% CI: 1.43-28.03) than incident cases. In-hospital use of beta-blockers was less frequent among recurrent compared to incident cases (OR=0.45; 95% CI: 0.24-0.85), while no statistically significant differences between groups were observed regarding angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker, statin, aspirin or invasive procedures.
conclusionA more severe clinical expression of the disease and underutilisation of treatment among recurrent AMIs are likely to explain their poorer prognosis compared to incident AMIs.
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.