ArticleClinical cardiology2022
Trends in conventional cardiovascular risk factors and myocardial infarction subtypes among young Chinese men with a first acute myocardial infarction.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review on the Risk Modulators of Myocardial Infarction in the "Young"-Implications of Lipoprotein (a).International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Pooled it
- First myocardial infarction in patients with premature coronary artery disease: insights into patient characteristics and outcome after treatment with contemporary stents.European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care · 2023Article
- Trends in conventional cardiovascular risk factors and myocardial infarction subtypes among young Chinese men with a first acute myocardial infarction.Clinical cardiology · 2022Article
- Impact of Obesity on Microvascular Obstruction and Area at Risk in Patients After ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is limited data on the characteristics of conventional risk factors (RFs) in young Chinese men hospitalized with a first acute myocardial infarction (AMI). HYPOTHESIS: We analyzed the trends in and prevalence of cardiovascular RFs and subtypes of MI during the first AMI in young Chinese men.
methodsA total of 2739 men aged 18-44 years hospitalized for a first AMI were identified from 2007 to 2017. The overall prevalence of RFs and their respective temporal trends and subtypes of AMI were evaluated.
resultsThe most prevalent conditions were smoking, followed by hypertension and then obesity. Patients aged <35 years had a much higher prevalence of hypercholesterolemia and obesity. Compared with a similar reference population in the United States, young Chinese men had a higher prevalence of smoking and dyslipidemia, but a lower prevalence of obesity, hypertension, and diabetes. The prevalence of hypertension increased from 2007 through 2017 (p trend <.001), whereas smoking decreased gradually. AMI frequently presented as ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) (77.5%). Cluster of conventional RFs (3 RFs, odds ratio [OR]: 1.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11-2.57; ≥4 RFs, OR: 2.50, 95% CI: 1.55-4.03] and multivessel disease (OR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.08-1.60) increased the risk of non-STEMI (NSTEMI).
conclusionsConventional RFs were highly prevalent in young Chinese men who were hospitalized for first AMI events, and the temporal trends varied different between China and US populations. Multivessel disease and cluster of conventional RFs are closely related to NSTEMI. Optimized preventive strategies among young adults are warranted.
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.