ArticleInternal medicine (Tokyo, Japan)2026
Impact of Controlled Blood Pressure and Pulse Rate at Discharge on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Non-ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.
Article in Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), and beta-blockers (BBs) are commonly prescribed for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). However, the target blood systolic pressure (SBP) or pulse rate (PR) in these patients has not been established. This study aimed to assess the association between SBP/PR control at discharge and the clinical outcomes in patients with NSTEMI. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 596 patients with NSTEMI who received both ACEis/ARBs and BBs at discharge. Patients were categorized into a good control group (SBP ≤130 mmHg and PR ≤80 bpm, n=379) and poor control group (SBP >130 mmHg or PR >80 bpm, n=217). The primary endpoint was major cardiovascular events (MACEs), defined as the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and heart failure readmission. Results During a median follow-up of 1,267 days, 205 MACEs occurred. Kaplan-Meier curves showed higher MACE rates in the poor control group than in the good control group (p=0.003). A multivariate Cox hazard analysis revealed that the good control group was inversely associated with MACEs (hazard ratio 0.748, 95% confidence interval: 0.561-0.997, p=0.048) after controlling for confounding factors. Conclusion Good control of SBP and PR was inversely associated with long-term adverse events in patients with NSTEMI who received both ACEis/ARBs and BBs. This study highlights the significance of optimizing medication titrations at discharge.
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.