ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2024
Clinical predictors and outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction related cardiogenic shock in the Asian population.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of Outcomes Between ST-Segment Elevation and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarctions Based on Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating myocardial infarction is associated with poor outcomes. Data among Asian populations are scarce. We aimed to investigate the long-term outcomes, prognostic factors, and predictors of CS among Asian ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for STEMI within our regional STEMI network between 2015 and 2019. The long-term outcomes of those with and without CS were compared. Clinical predictors of outcomes and development of CS were investigated. Results: A total of 1791 patients who underwent PPCI were included. Patients completed at least 2 years' follow-up with a median follow-up period of 2.6 years (IQR 1.0, 3,9). Overall, 208/1791 (11.6 %) STEMI patients developed CS. These patients were older (61.1 ± 12.5 vs 57.8 ± 12.2, P < 0.001) and mostly men (87.0 %). All-cause mortality (59.9 % vs 4.7 % P < 0.001), cardiac mortality (43.8 % vs 2.2 %, P < 0.001) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was significantly higher in the CS group (59.1 % vs 14.0 %, P < 0.001). Independent predictors of survival were higher index LVEF (adjusted hazards ratio [aHR] 0.967, 95 %CI 0.951-0.984, p < 0.001) and higher arterial pH at onset of shock (aHR 0.750, 0.626-0.897, p = 0.002). Increased serum lactate concentration independently predicts poor prognosis (aHR 1.084, 95 % CI 1.046-1.124, p < 0.001). Conclusion: In Asian STEMI patients who underwent PPCI, CS was associated with poor outcomes. Higher LVEF on index admission was associated with better outcomes; while lactic acidosis independently predicted mortality.
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.