ArticleArchives of medical science : AMS2022
Post-discharge and long-term follow-up after an acute coronary syndrome: International Collaborative Group of CNCF position paper.
Article in Archives of medical science : AMS, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Guideline
- Psychological Burden and Psychosocial Stress in Younger and Middle-Aged Women with Prior Myocardial Infarction.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- The impact of follow-up care for patients presenting with non-typical chest pain at the emergency department.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2026Article
- Patterns in Prescribing and Predictors of SGLT2 Inhibitor Administration in Patients with Heart Failure and Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Optimizing care and quality indicators in the management of patients with acute ischaemic heart disease and atherothrombotic stroke: measuring to improve.Drugs in context · 2026Article
- Guideline for Chronic Coronary Syndrome - 2025.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025Article
- Excessive autophagy of myocardial cells promotes ferroptosis and exacerbates heart failure in the state of myocardial infarction.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2025Article
- Use of primary healthcare services before and after specialized rehabilitation and its relation to changes in health and functioning: a longitudinal cohort study.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2024Article
- Gender differences in efficiency of the telemedicine care of heart failure patients. The results from the TeleEduCare-HF study.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2024Article
- Intensive Statin Therapy Versus Upfront Combination Therapy of Statin and Ezetimibe in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis Based on the PL-ACS Data.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Observational
- Management of Coronary Artery Disease in Older Adults: Recent Advances and Gaps in Evidence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Review
- Adherence to statin therapy: it seems we know everything, yet we do nothing.European heart journal open · 2022Article
- 2022: the year in cardiovascular disease - the year of upfront lipid lowering combination therapy.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2022Article
- Exploring Barriers to Physical Activity Among Jordanian Patients Suffering From Coronary Heart Disease: A Qualitative Study.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Long-term follow-up after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) presents a crucial challenge due to the high residual cardiovascular risk and the potential for major bleeding events. Although several treatment strategies are available, this article focuses on patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ACS, which is a frequent clinical situation. This position paper aims to support physicians in daily practice to improve the management of ACS patients. Material and methods: A group of recognized international and French experts in the field provides an overview of current evidence-based recommendations - supplemented by expert opinion where such evidence is lacking - and a practical guide for the management of patients with ACS after hospital discharge. Results: The International Collaborative Group underlines the need of a shared collaborative approach, and a care plan individualized to the patient's risk profile for both ischaemia and bleeding. Each follow-up appointment should be viewed as an opportunity to optimize the personalized approach, to reduce adverse clinical outcomes and improve quality of life. As risks - both ischaemic and haemorrhagic - evolve over time, the risk-benefit balance should be assessed in an ongoing dynamic process to ensure that patients are given the most suitable treatment at each time point. Conclusions: This Expert Opinion aims to help clinicians with a practical guide underlying the proven strategies and the remaining gaps of evidence to optimize the management of coronary patients.
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.