ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2024
NSTEMI and Ischemic Mitral Regurgitation: Incidence and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes with Respect to Management Strategy.
Article in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 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.
- Mitral Regurgitation after Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Multi-Faceted Condition.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal treatment for ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) in patients of non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is a debated topic.
objectiveTo evaluate the long term outcome on patients with NSTEMI and IMR, particularly emphasizing the comparison of treatments in those with moderate to severe MR.
methodsWe enrolled patients with NSTEMI and classified non/trivial to mild regurgitation as insignificant IMR and moderate to severe regurgitation as significant IMR. Furthermore, patients with substantial IMR were assessed for long-term clinical outcomes with respect to different management strategies. A test was considered statistically significant based on the probability value p<0.05.
resultsFrom a total of 4,189 patients of NSTEMI, significant IMR was found in 7.21% of patients. A significantly higher number of patients with death (1.21% vs. 13.24%, p<0.0001), cardiogenic shock (0.46% vs. 13.24%, p<0.0001) and heart failure (1.03% vs. 11.59%, p<0.0001) were found during hospitalization in patients with significant IMR. At a 2-year follow-up, a higher event rate was observed in the significant IMR group. Patients with significant IMR re-vascularized either by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), or CABG+ mitral valve (MV) surgery showed substantial improvement in MR grade ( 32.65% vs. 6% vs. 16.98%, p<0.0001) and LVEF (27.55% vs. 1% vs. 1.89%, p<0.0001) at 1 year follow up and significantly improved outcomes were identified compared to refused revascularization and medical management group with (-5.10% vs. 15% vs. 13.21%, p=0.04) mortality, (-33.67% vs. 61% vs. 73.58%, p<0.0001) readmission, and (-15.31% vs. 27% vs. 33.96%, p=0.01) heart failure at 2 years follow up.
conclusionHigher mortality and admission rates were observed in patients with significant IMR compared to those with in-significant IMR. Notably, significant IMR patients who underwent PCI, CABG, or CABG+MV surgery showed improved outcomes compared to non-revascularized counterparts.
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.