ArticleSaudi medical journal2023
Prospective evaluation of lipid management following acute coronary syndrome in Saudi Arabia.
Article in Saudi medical journal, 2023. 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.
- Advancing Lipid Management: Saudi Heart Association Position Statement on PCSK9-targeted Therapies in the Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease.Journal of the Saudi Heart Association · 2026Article
- The Role of Lipid Disorders in Cardiovascular Mortality Among Saudis: A Review Perspective.International journal of endocrinology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate LDL-C control in patients within 6 months after hospitalization for ACS in Saudi Arabia.
methodsThis multicenter, prospective, observational registry evaluates LDL-C control in patients within 6 months after hospitalization for ACS in Saudi Arabia between December 2017 and October 2019. The study aimed at recruiting 170 patients and data were collected retrospectively at baseline and prospectively at 2 subsequent visits.
results201 patients were included at baseline, 193 completed the 3-month visit and 186 completed the 6-month visit. Post-ACS, virtually all patients were prescribed high-intensity statins and LDL-C levels decreased consistently. However, at LDL-C target assessment, 57.1% of patients still had LDL-C levels >55 mg/dL, while 62.6% of patients had achieved LDL-C level decrease >50%. The composite milestone of LDL-C decrease >50% and LDL-C levels <55 mg/dL was met by 20.6% of study patients. Importantly, 37% of patients did not have LDL-C reading post-ACS and the primary outcome was only valuable for 126 out of 201 patients (63%).
conclusionLevels and decrease of LDL-C from baseline achieved in this study are suboptimal, according to updated 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines. While statins were prescribed to all patients post-ACS, the recommended add-on treatments were largely overlooked. Gaps in dyslipidemia management linger, despite clear updated guidelines.
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.