Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30684029›Full record

ArticleHeart and vessels2019

Higher non-cardiac mortality and lesser impact of early revascularization in patients with type 2 compared to type 1 acute myocardial infarction: results from the Tokyo CCU Network registry.

Satoshi Higuchi, Makoto Suzuki, Yu Horiuchi, Hiroyuki Tanaka, Mike Saji, Hideaki Yoshino, Ken Nagao, Takeshi Yamamoto, Morimasa Takayama

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Heart and vessels, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Satoshi HiguchiTokyo CCU Network Scientific Committee, Tokyo, Japan. sahiguchi-circ@umin.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7914-8256
Makoto SuzukiTokyo CCU Network Scientific Committee, Tokyo, Japan.
Yu HoriuchiTokyo CCU Network Scientific Committee, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroyuki TanakaTokyo CCU Network Scientific Committee, Tokyo, Japan.
Mike SajiTokyo CCU Network Scientific Committee, Tokyo, Japan.
Hideaki YoshinoTokyo CCU Network Scientific Committee, Tokyo, Japan.
Ken NagaoTokyo CCU Network Scientific Committee, Tokyo, Japan.
Takeshi YamamotoTokyo CCU Network Scientific Committee, Tokyo, Japan.
Morimasa TakayamaTokyo CCU Network Scientific Committee, Tokyo, Japan.
Shibuya University Network · JPKyorin University · JP

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 17K18085
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the definition of type 2 acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is obscure, the characteristics of this disease vary among studies. The clinical significance of type 2 AMI is unclear. We surveyed the Tokyo Cardiovascular Care Unit (CCU) Network registry between 2010 and 2014. The difference in clinical characteristics and the impact of revascularization in patients with type 1 and type 2 AMI were evaluated. The cohort study included 12514 patients admitted to CCU (type 1 AMI, 12023; type 2 AMI, 491; mean age, 68 ± 15 years; 75% male). Coronary angiography was performed in 11402 patients (95%) with type 1 AMI and 427 (87%) with type 2 AMI (p < 0.001). Type 2 AMI was associated with higher in-hospital mortality (type 1 AMI, 769 (6.4%); type 2 AMI, 54 (11.0%); adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.64; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-2.41; p = 0.011) and higher non-cardiac mortality (adjusted OR 2.19; 95% CI 1.33-3.62; p = 0.002), but similar cardiac mortality rate compared to type 1 AMI (adjusted OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.71-1.91; p = 0.539). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 24 h after the onset was associated with lower in-hospital mortality in those with type 1 AMI (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.40-0.55; p < 0.001), but not in those with type 2 AMI (OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.62-1.94; p = 0.763). The results persisted after adjustment for multivariate logistic regression analysis and inverted probability weighting. In conclusion, patients with type 2 AMI had higher in-hospital mortality owing to higher non-cardiac death. More refined definitions focusing on the treatment of comorbidities may be required, as the treatment strategy for type 2 AMI can be different from that for type 1 AMI.

Indexed as

Hospital MortalityAgedAged, 80 and overCoronary AngiographyFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisMyocardial InfarctionPercutaneous Coronary InterventionProspective StudiesRegistriesTime FactorsTokyoAcute myocardial infarctionNon-cardiac mortalityPercutaneous coronary interventionType 2 AMIUniversal definition of myocardial infarction

Identifiers

PMID30684029
OpenAlexW2912241114

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.