ArticleMedicine2020
Complications during hospitalization and at 30 days in the intensive cardiac care unit for patients with ST-elevation versus non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis.
Article in Medicine, 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.
- Complications in Emergency Department Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome with Contemporary Care.Cardiology · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn this meta-analysis, we aimed to systematically compare the complications during hospitalization and at 30 days respectively, in intensive cardiac care unit (ICCU) for patients with ST elevation (STE) vs non-STE acute coronary syndrome (NSTE ACS).
methodsElectronic search databases including http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and MEDLINE were searched for publications comparing complications observed in STE ACS vs NSTE ACS patients admitted in ICCU, intensive care unit (ICU) or coronary care unit (CCU). This is a meta-analysis and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to illustrate the data following analysis by the RevMan 5.3 software.
resultsSix studies consisting of a total number of 25,604 participants (12,880 participants admitted due to STE ACS and 12,724 participants admitted due to NSTE ACS) were included. Our results showed that the total outcomes including severely abnormal electrocardiography (ECG) (RR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.27-1.73; P = .00001) and mortality (RR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.64-2.04; P = .00001) were significantly higher in patients with STE ACS. Re-infarction (RR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.62-1.19; P = .37) and heart failure (RR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.88-1.23; P = .62) were similarly manifested in those patients with ACS. However, the risk for recurrent angina was significantly higher with NSTE ACS (RR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.46-0.92; P = .01).
conclusionsPatients with STE ACS were at a higher risk for in-hospital and 30 days mortality in this analysis. In hospital, severely abnormal ECG was also significantly higher in this category of patients compared to NSTE ACS. However, re-admission for heart failure and re-infarction was similar in both groups. Future studies should be able to confirm this hypothesis.
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.