SynthesisAnnals of medicine2024
Benefits of intensive lipid-lowering therapies in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Annals of medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07290699 (INtensive Cholesterol-Lowering With recatIcimab combiNation in Emergency PCI for Acute Myocardial Infarction), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
INtensive Cholesterol-Lowering With recatIcimab combiNation in Emergency PCI for Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intensive Lipid-Lowering Therapy Following Acute Coronary Syndrome: The Earlier the Better.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Is Influenza Vaccination Our Best 'Shot' at Preventing MACE? Review of Current Evidence, Underlying Mechanisms, and Future Directions.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Apolipoprotein B and Glycemic Dysregulation: New Predictors of Type 2 Diabetes in High-Cardiovascular-Risk Populations.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- The correlation between lipoprotein(a) and major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with acute myocardial infarction combined with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Global Guidance for Dyslipidaemia Management in Adults: A Scoping Review.Global heart · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious meta-analyses have investigated the efficacy of lipid-lowering therapies for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; however, few have focused on patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This meta-analysis aimed to compare the benefits of intensive lipid-lowering therapy with those of background statin therapy in patients with ACS.
methodsSearches were performed on PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for articles published until April 13, 2023. Randomized controlled trials that compared intensive lipid-lowering therapies and background statin therapies in patients with prior ACS and recorded the outcome of three-point major cardiovascular events (MACE) were included. The risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used as a measure of primary and secondary outcomes.
resultsNine trials involving 38,640 patients with ACS were identified. Pooled results suggested that intensive lipid-lowering therapies are associated with a reduction in the risk of three-point MACE (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.83-0.94;
conclusionsIntensive lipid-lowering therapies may reduce the risk of three-point MACE, recurrent ACS, nonfatal MI, stroke, and hospitalization for unstable angina in patients with ACS undergoing background statin therapy. These results may assist in clinical decision-making for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events to initiate intensive lipid-lowering therapies immediately after ACS.
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.