ArticleScientific reports2021
Decongestant use and the risk of myocardial infarction and stroke: a case-crossover study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Value of Sensitivity Analyses in Assessing the Risk of Two Rare Neurological Adverse Events and Pseudoephedrine Use.Drug safety · 2025Article
- Part 1 - imidazolines and the changing face of nasal decongestants.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Pharmacists' Attitudes Towards Long-Term Use of Nasal Decongestants: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pharmacovigilance reports of cerebral and cardiovascular events in those who use decongestants have triggered alerts related to their use. We aimed to assess the risk of stroke and myocardial infarction (MI) associated with the use of decongestants. We conducted a nested case-crossover study of patients with incident stroke and MI identified in France between 2013 and 2016 in two systematic disease registries. Decongestant use in the three weeks preceding the event was assessed using a structured telephone interview. Conditional logistic multivariable models were used to estimate the odds of incident MI and stroke, also accounting for transient risk factors and comparing week 1 (index at-risk time window, immediately preceding the event) to week 3 (reference). Time-invariant risk factors were controlled by design. In total, 1394 patients with MI and 1403 patients with stroke, mainly 70 years old or younger, were interviewed, including 3.2% who used decongestants during the three weeks prior to the event (1.0% definite exposure in the index at-risk time window, 1.1% in the referent time window; adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.78; 95%CI, 0.43-1.42). Secondary analysis yielded similar results for individual events (MI/stroke). We observed no increased risk of MI or stroke for patients 70 years of age and younger without previous MI or stroke who used decongestants.
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.