ReviewPostgraduate medical journal1995
The management of acute myocardial infarction.
Review in Postgraduate medical journal, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Limited benefits of ambulance telemetry in delivering early thrombolysis: a randomised controlled trial.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2005Trial
- Bridging the gap with new strategies in acute ST elevation myocardial infarction: bolus thrombolysis, glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, combination therapy, percutaneous coronary intervention, and "facilitated" PCI.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2000Review
- Management of acute myocardial infarction.Postgraduate medical journal · 1996Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Greater understanding of the underlying pathophysiology of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has led to more aggressive management and lower mortality, both in-hospital and long term. AMI results mainly from thrombotic occlusion of the infarct-related coronary artery. The ensuing necrosis evolves over a 6-12 h period providing a time window for interventions designed to reduce eventual infarct size. The most appropriate interventions are those which restore coronary artery patency and hence myocardial blood flow as soon as possible. Occasionally, disruption of the occluding thrombus and compression of the underlying atheromatous lesion is best achieved by direct percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. For the vast majority however, revascularisation by drug therapy is more appropriate. As soon as possible, all patients without contraindications should be offered oral aspirin and intravenous thrombolysis, usually with streptokinase but occasionally with tissue plasminogen activator. Patients in whom these agents are contraindicated should be considered for intravenous beta-blockade using atenolol or metoprolol to reduce myocardial demand and hence infarct size. Patients with large infarcts, impaired ventricular function, left ventricular failure or hypertension should be considered for early angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor therapy. Other agents may be valuable symptomatically, but have no proven role in reducing infarct size or mortality. After the first 24 h, the main aims of management are to assess the likelihood of later ischaemic events or death (risk stratification) and hence to choose appropriate long term secondary prophylaxis.
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.