ArticlePloS one2022
Clinical impact of statin intensity according to age in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-intensity statin on 3-year clinical outcomes in elderly acute myocardial infarction patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Link between Magnesium Supplements and Statin Medication in Dyslipidemic Patients.Current issues in molecular biology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe available data are not sufficient to understand the clinical impact of statin intensity in elderly patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) due to acute myocardial infarction (AMI).
methodsUsing the COREA-AMI registry, we sought to compare the clinical impact of high- versus low-to-moderate-intensity statin in younger (<75 years old) and elderly (≥75 years old) patients. Of 10,719 patients, we included 8,096 patients treated with drug-eluting stents. All patients were classified into high-intensity versus low-to-moderate-intensity statin group according to statin type and dose at discharge. The primary end point was target-vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiovascular death, target-vessel MI, or target-lesion revascularization (TLR) from 1 month to 12 months after index PCI.
resultsIn younger patients, high-intensity statin showed the better clinical outcomes than low-to-moderate-intensity statin (TVF: 79 [5.4%] vs. 329 [6.8%], adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.99; P = 0.038). However, in elderly patients, the incidence rates of the adverse clinical outcomes were similar between two statin-intensity groups (TVF: 38 [11.4%] vs. 131 [10.6%], aHR 1.1; 95% CI 0.76-1.59; P = 0.63).
conclusionsIn this AMI cohort underwent PCI, high-intensity statin showed the better 1-year clinical outcomes than low-to-moderate-intensity statin in younger patients. Meanwhile, the incidence rates of adverse clinical events between high- and low-to-moderate-intensity statin were not statistically different in elderly patients. Further randomized study with large elderly population is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.