Observational studyLa Tunisie medicale
New-onset atrial fibrillation after acute coronary syndrome: prevalence and predictive factors.
Observational study in La Tunisie medicale. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral anticoagulant therapy and outcomes in new-onset atrial fibrillation during acute myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of cardiology · 2026Article
- Diagnostic and short-term prognosis value of serum ox-LDL/LOX-1 and GDF-15 in elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Article
- Construction and validation of a nomogram prediction model for the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation following percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction patients.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNew-onset AF atrial fibrillation (NOAF) frequently complicates acute coronary syndromes (ACS) leading to adverse outcomes in the short and long term. The prevalence of NOAF in patients hospitalized for ACS is variably reported and ranges between 2 and 37%. Several predictor factors have been implicated in the literature but remain a subject of controversy.
aimTo determine the prevalence of NOAF in a population of patients admitted for ACS and to identify its predictive factors.
methodsWe carried out a prospective, descriptive and comparative observational study in hospitalized patients with ACS who did not have a previous diagnosis of AF.
resultsIn our study, we included 404 patients hospitalized for ACS. The prevalence of NOAF was 10%. In the multivariate analytical study, we retained as independent predictors of NOAF: age greater than 62 years (p = 0.04; adjusted OR = 4.83; CI95%: 1.07-21.77), chronic renal failure (p = 0.043; adjusted OR = 6.61; CI95%: 1.06-35.80), history of stroke (p = 0.002; adjusted OR = 44.51; CI95%: 3.97- 498.10) and finally uricemia greater than or equal to 62 mg / l (p = 0.04; adjusted OR = 4.4; CI95%: 1.06-18.15).
conclusionsThe prevalence of NOAF in patients with ACS was 10%. Its systematic screening in these patients appears to be a relevant approach because of the strong association between these two pathologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35852244PMC9272446W4286008584What 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.