SynthesisReviews in cardiovascular medicine2025
The Association of Lipoprotein(a) with Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events after Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies.
Synthesis in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of Elevated Lipoprotein(a) Levels with Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Non-Diabetic Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Cohort Study from Bosnia and Herzegovina.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Clinical Relevance of Lipoprotein(a) in Young Acute Myocardial Infarction: STEMI vs. NSTEMI.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Lipoprotein(a) and High-Risk Coronary Plaques: Mechanisms, Characteristics, and Emerging Therapeutic Strategies.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite evidence suggesting a link between lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) and the occurrence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the relationship regarding prognoses related to AMI remains unclear. This meta-analysis was conducted to summarize the association between Lp(a) and the risks of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) among populations surviving AMI. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases until February 14, 2024. Cohort studies reporting multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for the correlation of Lp(a) with MACEs in AMI populations were identified. The Lp(a) level was analyzed using categorical and continuous variables. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on gender, type of AMI, diabetic and hypertensive status. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots. A random-effect model was utilized to pool the results. Results: In total, 23 cohorts comprising 30,027 individuals were recruited. In comparison to those categorized with the lowest serum Lp(a), individuals in the highest category showed higher risks of MACEs after AMI (HR: 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01-1.09, Conclusions: Higher Lp(a) levels might be an independent indicator for MACE risks after AMI, especially among female populations with DM and/or hypertension, and more suitable for evaluating long-term MACEs. The PROSPERO Registration: CRD42024511985, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024511985.
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.