Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34020593›Full record

ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2021

Impact of renin angiotensin system inhibitor on 3-year clinical outcomes in acute myocardial infarction patients with preserved left ventricular systolic function: a prospective cohort study from Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR).

Kyung-Hee Kim, Byoung Geol Choi, Seung-Woon Rha, Cheol Ung Choi, Myung-Ho Jeong, Other KAMIR-NIH investigators

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kyung-Hee Kim *Cardiovascular Center, Incheon Sejong Hospital, Incheon, South Korea.
Byoung Geol Choi *Cardiovascular Research Institute, University, Seoul, South Korea.
Seung-Woon RhaCardiovascular Center, Korea University Guro Hospital, 148, Gurodong-ro, Guro-gu, Seoul, 08308, South Korea. swrha617@yahoo.co.kr.
Cheol Ung ChoiCardiovascular Center, Korea University Guro Hospital, 148, Gurodong-ro, Guro-gu, Seoul, 08308, South Korea.
Myung-Ho JeongDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Chonnam National University Hospital, Gwangju, South Korea.
Other KAMIR-NIH investigators
Korea University Medical Center · KRIncheon Medical Center · KRChonnam National University Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are usually treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) if ACEIs are not tolerated. However, there is no data regarding the impact of switching from ACEIs to ARBs on long-term clinical outcomes in AMI patients with preserved left ventricular (LV) systolic function especially beyond 1 year. To investigate the effectiveness of treatment with ACEIs or ARBs on clinical outcomes over 3 years in AMI patients with preserved LV systolic function following percutaneous coronary intervention.

methodIt is a prospective cohort study using data from a nationwide large scale registry with 53 hospitals involved in treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in Korea. Between March 2011 and September 2015, we enrolled 6236 patients with AMI who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention and had a left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50%. Main outcome measures composite of total death or recurrent AMI over 3 years after AMI. Patients were divided into an ACEI group (n = 2945), ARB group (n = 2197), or no renin-angiotensin system inhibitor (RASI) treatment (n = 1094). We analyzed patients who changed treatment. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was also performed.

resultsAfter the adjustment with inverse probability weighting, the primary endpoints at 1 year, AMI patients receiving ACEIs showed overall better outcomes than ARBs [ARBs hazard ratio (HR) compared with ACEIs 1.384, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-1.71; P = 0.003]. However, 33% of patients receiving ACEIs switched to ARBs during the first year, while only about 1.5% switched from ARBs to ACEIs. When landmark analysis was performed from 1 year to the end of the study, RASI group showed a 31% adjusted reduction in primary endpoint compared to patients with no RASI group (HR, 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.97; P = 0.012).

conclusionsThis result suggests that certain patients got benefit from treatment with ACEIs in the first year if tolerated, but switching to ARBs beyond the first year produced similar outcomes. RASI beyond the first year reduced death or recurrent AMI in AMI patients with preserved LV systolic function. CRIS Registration number: KCT0004990.

Indexed as

Percutaneous Coronary InterventionAgedAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsDrug SubstitutionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionProspective StudiesRecurrenceRegistriesRenin-Angiotensin SystemRepublic of KoreaRisk AssessmentAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsAMIPreserved LV systolic functionRAS inhibitor

Identifiers

PMID34020593
PMCPMC8140424
OpenAlexW3161583474

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.