ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction Based on Institutional Experience With IVUS.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention improves patient outcomes, yet the impact of a center's IVUS experience on long-term outcomes remains unclear. We evaluated whether the prognostic association of IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction differs based on a center's level of IVUS use.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 9752 patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with second-generation drug-eluting stents from the KAMIR-NIH (Korean Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institutes of Health). The primary outcome was 3-year major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and coronary revascularization. The secondary outcome was target-lesion failure, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. Centers were classified into higher- or lower-IVUS-use groups on the basis of median institutional usage (10.3%).
resultsIn higher-use centers, IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with lower rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (15.3% versus 18.5%,
conclusionsThe association of IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary intervention with lower adverse event rates was more apparent and statistically demonstrable in centers with higher IVUS use. These findings suggest that institutional experience may amplify the observable impact of IVUS guidance, underscoring the potential value of standardized IVUS implementation in acute myocardial infarction management.
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.