Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36079008›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes after Non-ST-Segment and ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Diabetic and Nondiabetic Populations.

Yong Hoon Kim, Ae-Young Her, Seung-Woon Rha, Cheol Ung Choi, Byoung Geol Choi, Ji Bak Kim, Soohyung Park, Dong Oh Kang, Ji Young Park, Sang-Ho Park and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Yong Hoon KimDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangwon National University School of Medicine, Chuncheon 24289, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9669-3598
Ae-Young HerDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangwon National University School of Medicine, Chuncheon 24289, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9990-6843
Seung-Woon RhaCardiovascular Center, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul 08308, Korea.
Cheol Ung ChoiCardiovascular Center, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul 08308, Korea.
Byoung Geol ChoiCardiovascular Research Institute, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul 02841, Korea.
Ji Bak KimCardiovascular Center, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul 08308, Korea.
Soohyung ParkCardiovascular Center, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul 08308, Korea.
Dong Oh KangCardiovascular Center, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul 08308, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5187-8310
Ji Young ParkDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Cardiovascular Center, Nowon Eulji Medical Center, Eulji University, Seoul 01830, Korea.
Sang-Ho ParkCardiology Department, Soonchunhyang University Cheonan Hospital, Cheonan 31151, Korea.
Myung Ho JeongDepartment of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Center, Chonnam National University Hospital, Gwangju 61469, Korea.
Korea University Medical Center · KRKangwon National University · KRSoonchunhyang University · KRChonnam National University Hospital · KREulji University · KRKorea University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Using a new-generation drug-eluting stent, we compared the 2-year clinical outcomes of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and non-DM concomitant with a non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and an ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. A total of 11,798 patients with acute myocardial infarction were classified into two groups: DM (NSTEMI, n = 2399; STEMI, n = 2693) and non-DM (NSTEMI, n = 2694; STEMI, n = 4012). The primary clinical outcome was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or any coronary repeat revascularization. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of definite or probable stent thrombosis. In all the patients, both multivariable and propensity score-adjusted analyses revealed that the incidence rates of MACE (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 1.214; p = 0.006 and aHR, 1.298; p = 0.002, respectively), all-cause death, cardiac death (CD), and non-CD rate were significantly higher in the NSTEMI group than in the STEMI group. Additionally, among patients with NSTEMI, there was a higher non-CD rate (aHR, 2.200; p = 0.007 and aHR, 2.484; p = 0.004, respectively) in the DM group and a higher CD rate (aHR, 2.688; p < 0.001 and 2.882; p < 0.001, respectively) in the non-DM group. In this retrospective study, patients with NSTEMI had a significantly higher 2-year mortality rate than those with STEMI did. Furthermore, strategies to reduce the non-CD rate in patients with DM and the CD rate in patients without DM could be beneficial for those with NSTEMI.

Indexed as

diabetesnon-ST-elevation myocardial infarctionoutcomesST-elevation myocardial infarction

Identifiers

PMID36079008
PMCPMC9456669
OpenAlexW4293724333

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.