ArticleJACC. Advances2025
Time Trends in Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Meta-Analysis on Sex Differences.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy de-escalation in East Asian individuals following percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Pooled it
- Cardiovascular and renal outcomes of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes post-PCI: a meta-analysis of 14,511 patients.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2026Article
- Trends and disparities in obesity and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease mortality in a 25-year retrospective analysis.Scientific reports · 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is considered the procedure of choice for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), as it significantly improves cardiovascular outcomes. However, considerable uncertainty persists regarding the potential sex differences in PCI outcomes, due to conflicting results in previous studies. Objectives: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate potential sex-related differences in cardiovascular adverse outcomes after PCI among ACS patients. Methods: The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and its components. Outcomes were examined in various time frames including: short-term (within 1 month after PCI), mid-term (within 1 year), and long-term (within >1 year). A random effects model was used to estimate risk ratios (RR) and 95% CIs. Results: Among 32 trials, at short-term, PCI was associated with a higher risk of MACE (risk ratio [RR]: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.10-1.86), all-cause mortality (RR: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.70-3.71), and myocardial infarction (RR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.00-1.77) in women compared with men. Over the long-term, women had a higher risk of MACE (RR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.01-1.22), all-cause mortality (RR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.17-1.42), and cardiovascular mortality (RR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.11-1.52), when compared with men. However, the analysis for stroke and repeat revascularization showed no significant difference between the 2 groups in the long- and short-term. Conclusions: In the meta-analysis of PCI-related trials in ACS, women have a higher risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes compared with men.
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.