ArticleCureus2020
A Rare ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Mimic or a True Event?
Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The etiology of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is either rupture or erosion of unstable plaque with subsequent thrombosis. With the widespread use of plaque-stabilizing lipid-lowering therapies (statins), plaque erosion, rather than rupture, now accounts for most cases of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). In the spectrum of ACS, STEMI usually results from the total occlusion of the culprit epicardial coronary artery, leading to the occlusion of blood flow to the affected myocardium. The differential diagnosis of ST-elevations on electrocardiograms are broad. However, an elevated cardiac marker, evidence of wall motion abnormality on echocardiogram or positive stress testing makes an alternate diagnosis less likely. This prompts emergent coronary angiography with an intent to fix the underlying cause. In some cases like ours, when the clinical suspicion of STEMI is high, the coronary angiography may be unrevealing of the diagnosis.
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.