ライフサイエンスコーパス: NSTEMI

1 NSTEMI patients were older and had a higher rate of medi

2 We reassessed 10 NSTEMI and 10 SA patients after 1 year.

3 From October, 2009, to November, 2011, NSTEMI patients were assigned oral losmapimod (7.5 mg or

4 rvention were included: 50 stable angina, 50 NSTEMI, and 40 STEMI.

5 yzed data including 72 352 patients (48 966, NSTEMI; 23 386, STEMI) from 237 US sites between May 1,

6 predictors of spontaneous MI were older age, NSTEMI versus UA as index event, diabetes mellitus, no p

7 a nationwide sample of STEMI (n=19 029) and NSTEMI (n=30 462) patients.

8 l or minimal angiographic disease (n=23) and NSTEMI (n=24), intravascular ultrasound-derived measures

9 serve ratio was similar in stable angina and NSTEMI patients (P=0.6).

10 higher pre-PCI in STEMI compared with SA and NSTEMI (IMR STEMI, 36.51 versus IMR NSTEMI, 22.73 [P=0.0

11 ck status of 235 541 patients with STEMI and NSTEMI treated at 392 US hospitals from 2007 to 2011.

12 , 30.5% and 42.9% of patients with STEMI and NSTEMI, respectively, had CKD.

13 py was high for patients with both STEMI and NSTEMI.

14 spectrum of myocardial infarction, STEMI and NSTEMI.

15 sed considerably for patients with STEMI and NSTEMI.

16 th high mortality in patients with STEMI and NSTEMI.

17 elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and NSTEMI (56% vs. 44%).

18 The association between AF and MI, total and NSTEMI, was stronger in women than in men (P for interac

19 vasive management among patients with UA and NSTEMI, in the context of contemporary medical therapy,

20 ve heart failure) among patients with UA and NSTEMI.

21 proving clinical outcomes in unstable angina/NSTEMI patients has led to investigations of its role in

22 e and quality measures were compared between NSTEMI and STEMI patients.

23 ignificant difference in IMR pre-PCI between NSTEMI and SA (IMR NSTEMI, 22.73; IMR SA, 18.26 [P=0.1])

24 vation (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation (NSTEMI) MI.

25 CREB activity and silencing PTPN22 enhanced NSTEMI patients' ability to generate Treg.

26 hs-cTnT change may not be useful to exclude NSTEMI, particularly as these patients show both short-t

27 n-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (FAMOUS-NSTEMI) study (NCT01764334) has recently demonstrated th

28 k factors, and medications, the age of first NSTEMI occurred 3.5, 6.8, 9.4, and 12.0 years earlier wi

29 The mean patient ages (+/- SD) of first NSTEMI were 74.6 +/- 14.3 years and 58.7 +/- 12.5 years

30 y mass index (BMI) with patient age of first NSTEMI.

31 ionship between BMI and earlier age of first NSTEMI.

32 xcess adiposity is strongly related to first NSTEMI occurring prematurely.

33 For NSTEMI, the analogous odds ratios were 1.81, 2.41, 3.50,

34 which enhances baseline risk assessment for NSTEMI care.

35 ce in IMR pre-PCI between NSTEMI and SA (IMR NSTEMI, 22.73; IMR SA, 18.26 [P=0.1]).

36 h SA and NSTEMI (IMR STEMI, 36.51 versus IMR NSTEMI, 22.73 [P=0.01] versus IMR SA, 18.26 [P<0.0001]).

37 compared with conventional PCI (n = 219) in NSTEMI patients with thrombus-containing lesions.

38 yrosine 292, enhancing T-cell activation, in NSTEMI helper T cells versus SA and controls (each, p <

39 of at least 3x upper reference limit and in NSTEMI as a pre-PCI troponin T fall, followed by post-PC

40 e response element-binding protein (CREB) in NSTEMI (p < 0.05 vs. controls), which recovered at 1 yea

41 IMI score was good in STEMI but only fair in NSTEMI.

42 Finally, in NSTEMI patients, helper T cells had a reduced ability in

43 tion thrombectomy in conjunction with PCI in NSTEMI with a thrombus-containing lesion does not lead t

44 f the microcirculation would be preserved in NSTEMI.

45 n with oral losmapimod was well tolerated in NSTEMI patients and might improve outcomes after acute c

46 ted OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.06-1.24), whereas in NSTEMI (adjusted OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63-0.95) and unstab

47 -ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Eve

48 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and to see if WBC count was a significant predic

49 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) can provide an estimate of a patient's prognosis

50 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) in a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlle

51 -ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is a controversial issue.

52 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is associated with increased risk of bleeding in

53 -ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) management has evolved considerably over the pas

54 -ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (S

55 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients.

56 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients.

57 -ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) reduce ischemic events but increase bleeding.

58 (UA)/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) that were conducted nearly a decade apart but wi

59 -ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) using intravascular ultrasound.

60 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) yields improved outcomes compared with a conserv

61 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), 20 with stable angina (SA), and 20 controls.

62 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

63 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), treatment with a P2Y12 antagonist with aspirin

64 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), whereas patients <65 years of age presented alm

65 with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

66 -ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

67 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

68 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

69 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

70 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

71 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

72 wing non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

73 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

74 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

75 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

76 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI)/unstable angina (UA) who were managed medically

77 -ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [NSTEMI] cases) underwent PCI.

78 ssel Non ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction [NSTEMI] PATIENTS: One Stage Versus Multistaged Percutane

79 ificantly underused in the medically managed NSTEMI population and demonstrates wide variability by h

80 PCI) for either non-ST segment elevation MI (NSTEMI) or stable angina.

81 especially in cases of non-ST elevation MI (NSTEMI), since these cases are not readily identified by

82 ion (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation MI (NSTEMI).

83 MI (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation MI (NSTEMI).

84 (STEMI) versus non-ST-segment elevation MI (NSTEMI).

85 rction [MI]; very small non-ST-elevation MI [NSTEMI] had peak troponin level <0.5 mug/L).

86 [STEMI] versus non-ST-segment-elevation MI [NSTEMI]) might shed light on the potential mechanisms.

87 her improvement, particularly in the care of NSTEMI patients.

88 mon in patients with a clinical diagnosis of NSTEMI in our hospital, a small hs-cTnT change may not b

89 in 1,178 patients with a final diagnosis of NSTEMI presenting <24 h after symptom onset.

90 nT) levels are required for the diagnosis of NSTEMI, according to the new universal definition of acu

91 cTnT was not mandatory for the diagnosis of NSTEMI, serial samples of cTnT were measured with a high

92 Early identification of NSTEMI patients who are at high risk of in-hospital mort

93 ischemic risk prediction for optimization of NSTEMI care; however, existing models are not well suite

94 Proportions of NSTEMI codes increased remarkably in both the primary an

95 vasoreactivity is blunted in the setting of NSTEMI, this is a reflection of the greater volume of at

96 ed 16,365 patients with incident UA (35%) or NSTEMI (65%); 36% of these patients were prescribed clop

97 unclassifiable MI group with either STEMI or NSTEMI did not change this conclusion.

98 ior clopidogrel use who presented with UA or NSTEMI between 2003 and 2008 and were medically managed

99 d September 2003, 56,352 patients with UA or NSTEMI were treated at 310 US hospitals participating in

100 ity in medically managed patients with UA or NSTEMI, the effectiveness of clopidogrel in actual clini

101 P<0.0001) and compared with NSTEMI patients (NSTEMI, 2.46; P</=0.001).

102 ny reperfusion (STEMI) or revascularization (NSTEMI), and had higher rates of bleeding.

103 In patients with high-risk NSTEMI, undergoing CAG within the initial 12 hours after

104 Compared with STEMI shock, NSTEMI shock was more likely in patients who were older

105 for older adults with hemodynamically stable NSTEMI and outcomes associated with ICU utilization amon

106 myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI (NSTEMI) who were undergoing PCI and receiving treatment

107 (STEMI), 14 466 (29% women) with non-STEMI (NSTEMI), and 19 777 (40% women) with unstable angina.

108 The TATORT-NSTEMI (Thrombus Aspiration in Thrombus Containing Culpr

109 n the STEMI cohort was 31.2% and 8.5% in the NSTEMI cohort of the PCI subpopulation.

110 otein cholesterol were more prevalent in the NSTEMI group.

111 nd the absolute change <9 ng/l in 12% of the NSTEMI patients.

112 However, this association is limited to NSTEMI.

113 pital major bleeding among community-treated NSTEMI patients enrolled in the Can Rapid risk stratific

114 ing was seen (elective PCI: 1.4% to 1.1%; UA/NSTEMI: 2.3% to 1.8; STEMI: 4.9% to 4.5%).

115 patients with elective PCI (n = 599,524), UA/NSTEMI (n = 836,103), and STEMI (n = 267,632).

116 gnificantly higher mortality 1 year after UA/NSTEMI (hazard ratio [HR], 1.65; 95% CI, 1.30-2.10) or S

117 ciated with higher 30-day mortality after UA/NSTEMI (odds ratio [OR], 1.78; 95% confidence interval [

118 patients who were medically managed after UA/NSTEMI, clopidogrel use was associated with a lower risk

119 se of FFR has not been investigated after UA/NSTEMI.

120 4% for elective PCI, and 5.7% to 2.8% for UA/NSTEMI (both p <0.001).

121 ocardial Infarction (TIMI) risk score for UA/NSTEMI is an integrated approach that uses baseline vari

122 year reduction in annual bleeding risk in UA/NSTEMI and elective PCI, but not in STEMI.

123 ve approach should be used more widely in UA/NSTEMI patients, particularly those at high risk.

124 benefits of an early invasive strategy in UA/NSTEMI.

125 a/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI) is a common but heterogeneous disorder with pati

126 -segment elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI) treated with the platelet glycoprotein (Gp IIb/I

127 -segment elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI).

128 -segment elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI).

129 -segment elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI).

130 -segment elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI).

131 ntaneous MI following a medically managed UA/NSTEMI event is common.

132 term natural history of medically managed UA/NSTEMI patients and could be used to optimize risk strat

133 ent elevation myocardial infarction (MI) (UA/NSTEMI) present with a wide spectrum of risk for death a

134 ch may aid the initial risk assessment of UA/NSTEMI, especially in women.

135 been validated in several other trials of UA/NSTEMI.

136 Seventy patients who had recent UA/NSTEMI and an intermediate single-vessel stenosis were r

137 1) the use of FFR in patients with recent UA/NSTEMI markedly reduces the duration and cost of hospita

138 rsus a conservative strategy in high-risk UA/NSTEMI patients treated with GP IIb/IIIa inhibition.

139 nd 15,459 with unstable angina/non-STEMI [UA/NSTEMI]), of whom 10 613 (17.1%) had diabetes.

140 tes than without diabetes presenting with UA/NSTEMI (2.1% vs 1.1%, P < .001) and STEMI (8.5% vs 5.4%,

141 Of the 2,220 patients with UA/NSTEMI enrolled in the Treat Angina with Aggrastat and D

142 ive the score was the 2,220 patients with UA/NSTEMI enrolled in the Treat Angina with Aggrastat and D

143 S, patients with diabetes presenting with UA/NSTEMI had a risk of death that approached patients with

144 In patients with UA/NSTEMI treated with the Gp IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban,

145 A total of 1957 patients with UA/NSTEMI were assigned to receive unfractionated heparin (

146 Among patients with UA/NSTEMI, a novel risk score based on admission clinical v

147 Among patients with UA/NSTEMI, elevated BNP levels are associated with tighter

148 conclusions: In patients with UA/NSTEMI, elevations in a simple, widely available blood t

149 Advances in the care of patients with UA/NSTEMI, including glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition and s

150 In patients with UA/NSTEMI, the TIMI risk score is a simple prognostication

151 In patients with UA/NSTEMI, there was a different pattern of presenting biom

152 6006 patients (3005 with STEMI and 3001 with NSTEMI) were enrolled in the trial.

153 are patients 65 years or older admitted with NSTEMI to 346 hospitals participating in the Acute Coron

154 However, AF was associated with NSTEMI (hazard ratio, 1.80; 95% confidence interval, 1.3

155 nonculprit, 2.9; P<0.0001) and compared with NSTEMI patients (NSTEMI, 2.46; P</=0.001).

156 n) trial, 4,033 patients were diagnosed with NSTEMI and 68.7% underwent PCI; 1,394 received pre-treat

157 Overall mortality in the group with NSTEMI was higher (10.9%) than patients with STEMI treat

158 Among patients hospitalized with NSTEMI in England and Wales, improvements in all-cause m

159 ional Registry of Myocardial Infarction with NSTEMI.

160 el may be preserved in selected patents with NSTEMI.

161 P value <0.0001) compared with patients with NSTEMI (40.8% shock versus 2.3% no shock, odds ratio, 19

162 Among 389057 patients with NSTEMI (median age, 72.7 years [IQR, 61.7-81.2 years]; 6

163 Of 28018 patients with NSTEMI 65 years or older (median age, 77 years [interqua

164 me With Otamixaban) randomized patients with NSTEMI and CAG scheduled within 72 hours to heparin plus

165 til 2015, whereas mortality in patients with NSTEMI appears stable since 2010.

166 omy on microvascular injury in patients with NSTEMI compared with standard percutaneous coronary inte

167 Patients with NSTEMI demonstrated greater segmental percent atheroma v

168 rescription rates among 23 186 patients with NSTEMI discharged from 382 US hospitals between October

169 Data on patients with NSTEMI in 247 hospitals in England and Wales were obtain

170 nting with shock at admission, patients with NSTEMI presenting with shock had longer delays to percut

171 the sample, 54.9% of eligible patients with NSTEMI received clopidogrel prescription at hospital dis

172 are, or outcomes among 145,357 patients with NSTEMI treated between January 1, 2001, and December 31,

173 Hospitals with high (>70% of patients with NSTEMI treated in an ICU during the index hospitalizatio

174 The proportion of patients with NSTEMI treated in the ICU varied across hospitals (media

175 ade about revascularization in patients with NSTEMI undergoing angiography within 48 h of admission.

176 ilization of the ICU for older patients with NSTEMI varied significantly among hospitals.

177 A total of 111,847 patients with NSTEMI were included in the final analysis.

178 e coronary microcirculation in patients with NSTEMI when compared with a model of preserved microcirc

179 y involving 40,616 consecutive patients with NSTEMI who received fondaparinux or LMWH between Septemb

180 tween the TRI and mortality in patients with NSTEMI with a >30-fold difference in mortality rates bet

181 and delayed (>24 hours) CAG in patients with NSTEMI with GRACE score >140 with ischemic outcomes.

182 In routine clinical care of patients with NSTEMI, fondaparinux was associated with lower odds than

183 In patients with NSTEMI, percutaneous coronary intervention </=72 hours f

184 ined stable (68+/-14 years) in patients with NSTEMI, whereas diabetes mellitus, obesity, and hyperten

185 with reperfusion therapy or in patients with NSTEMI, whether or not they were treated with percutaneo

186 p between TRI and mortality in patients with NSTEMI.

187 9% in 2010 and 6.3% in 2015 in patients with NSTEMI.

188 ath and MI, particularly among patients with NSTEMI.

189 ents with STEMI versus 4.3% of patients with NSTEMI.

190 ation is preserved in selected patients with NSTEMI.

191 presenting with shock than in patients with NSTEMI.

192 e higher-risk profile of the population with NSTEMI.

193 nificant only among patients presenting with NSTEMI (HR: 0.67; CI: 0.59 to 0.76; pint < 0.01), not am

194 Patients presenting with NSTEMI are increasing compared to STEMI and constitute a

195 th shock, particularly those presenting with NSTEMI.

196 t between patients with STEMI and those with NSTEMI and across other major subgroups.