Trial reportHeart and vessels2023
Zinc supplementation in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Trial report in Heart and vessels, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ion sequential therapy aligned with pathological changes enhances cardiac function after myocardial infarction.Cell reports. Medicine · 2026Article
- Anti-inflammatory effects of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 inhibitor therapy in the early phase of acute myocardial infarction.Heart and vessels · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This single-centre prospective feasibility study (UMIN000030232) evaluated whether zinc supplementation was safe and effective for improving outcomes among patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Within 24 h after successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention, consenting patients with AMI were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive conventional treatment (conventional treatment group) or conventional treatment plus zinc acetate supplementation (zinc supplementation group). The two groups were compared in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and scar size, which was evaluated using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) at 4 weeks after discharge. A total of 56 patients underwent randomization (with 26 assigned to the zinc supplementation group and 27 to the conventional treatment group). The two groups had generally similar laboratory findings and clinical characteristics. The two groups also had similar lengths of hospital stay and rates of MACE. Forty of the 53 patients underwent CMR and it revealed that % core zone was numerically lower in the zinc supplementation group than in the conventional treatment group (9.3 ± 6.9% vs. 14.2 ± 9.1%, P = 0.07). This small single-centre study failed to detect a significant reduction in mid-term MACE after AMI among patients who received zinc supplementation.
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.