FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4212779932> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4212779932 endingPage "e444" @default.
• W4212779932 startingPage "e443" @default.
• W4212779932 abstract "We thank Dr. Watanabe for his comment but respectfully disagree that our approach was “inadequate.” While coronary revascularization is an important consideration when examining associations with outcomes after myocardial infarction, we intentionally did not include it in the estimation of the propensity score, which was used to balance baseline characteristics between men and women, because revascularization is not a baseline characteristic but, rather, a future event.1Austin PC. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies.Multivariate Behav Res. 2011; 46: 399-424Crossref PubMed Scopus (4935) Google Scholar Moreover, adjusting for revascularization in models predicting outcomes is problematic because of confounding by indication (ie, the selection of patients for coronary intervention vs medical management only is largely influenced by the severity of myocardial infarction and by coronary anatomy, which ultimately determines the clinical outcome). The benefit of an invasive strategy in women with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome remains somewhat unclear. Despite an overall benefit for patients treated with revascularization in the FRISC II and RITA 3 trials,2Mehta SR Cannon CP Fox KA et al.Routine vs selective invasive strategies in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials.JAMA. 2005; 293: 2908-2917Crossref PubMed Scopus (661) Google Scholar subgroup analyses showed that revascularization may be associated with a higher risk of death or myocardial infarction in women.3Lagerqvist B Safstrom K Stahle E Wallentin L Swahn E. Is early invasive treatment of unstable coronary artery disease equally effective for both women and men? FRISC II Study Group Investigators.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001; 38: 41-48Crossref PubMed Scopus (205) Google Scholar,4Clayton TC Pocock SJ Henderson RA et al.Do men benefit more than women from an interventional strategy in patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction? The impact of gender in the RITA 3 trial.Eur Heart J. 2004; 25: 1641-1650Crossref PubMed Scopus (120) Google Scholar A meta-analysis by O'Donoghue et al5O'Donoghue M Boden WE Braunwald E et al.Early invasive vs conservative treatment strategies in women and men with unstable angina and non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis.JAMA. 2008; 300: 71-80Crossref PubMed Scopus (344) Google Scholar found that both men and high-risk women have a comparable benefit from an invasive strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome for reducing the odds of death, myocardial infarction, or rehospitalization with acute coronary syndrome. In contrast, an invasive strategy does not appear to substantially benefit low-risk women and may potentially increase the risk of death or myocardial infarction, possibly because of an increased prevalence of nonsignificant epicardial coronary artery disease and different coronary physiology. A more recent large prospective, multicenter myocardial infarction registry has shown that in-hospital revascularization after acute myocardial infarction, as well as female sex, were independent predictors of rehospitalization for acute coronary syndrome.6Arnold SV Smolderen KG Kennedy KF et al.Risk factors for rehospitalization for acute coronary syndromes and unplanned revascularization following acute myocardial infarction..J Am Heart Assoc. 2015; 4e001352Crossref Scopus (40) Google Scholar Importantly, most studies involving patients with myocardial infarction have focused on the benefit of coronary revascularization in decreasing the composite of death, myocardial infarction, and rehospitalization for acute coronary syndrome without providing clear evidence of reduction for recurrent myocardial infarction. Regardless of sex, the benefit of invasive strategy observed in most studies was largely driven by reduction in rehospitalizations, with modest effects on death or recurrent myocardial infarction. Our study shows that after incident myocardial infarction, women experienced a markedly increased risk of recurrent myocardial infarction as compared with men, after using propensity scores to equalize the most important and clinically relevant baseline characteristics between men and women.7Asleh R Manemann SM Weston SA et al.Sex differences in outcomes after myocardial infarction in the community.Am J Med. 2021; 134: 114-121Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (5) Google Scholar Our findings of an excess risk of recurrent myocardial infarction in women were in distinct contrast with the risk of heart failure, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular death, which did not differ by sex after propensity score adjustment. Although we could not, by design, account for unmeasured confounders, our findings suggest that the increased risk of recurrent myocardial infarction in women may be attributed to specific sex-mediated differences in the pathophysiology of coronary artery disease. Indeed, studies have shown that women experience more microvascular and nonobstructive coronary artery disease, coronary vasospasm, spontaneous coronary artery dissection, and higher susceptibility to thrombotic occlusions following revascularization.8Lansky AJ Ng VG Maehara A et al.Gender and the extent of coronary atherosclerosis, plaque composition, and clinical outcomes in acute coronary syndromes.JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012; 5: S62-S72Crossref PubMed Scopus (205) Google Scholar As patients without significant epicardial disease are unlikely to benefit from coronary intervention, the benefit of revascularization in decreasing recurrent myocardial infarction might be more challenging to determine in women. These data emphasize the need for further research to elucidate the underlying mechanisms and potential benefit from revascularization to improve outcomes for women after myocardial infarction." @default.
• W4212779932 created "2022-02-24" @default.
• W4212779932 creator A5018757309 @default.
• W4212779932 creator A5065857137 @default.
• W4212779932 creator A5088502721 @default.
• W4212779932 date "2021-07-01" @default.
• W4212779932 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W4212779932 title "The Reply" @default.
• W4212779932 cites W1984764033 @default.
• W4212779932 cites W2024263256 @default.
• W4212779932 cites W2036193982 @default.
• W4212779932 cites W2079106078 @default.
• W4212779932 cites W2096002945 @default.
• W4212779932 cites W2123585747 @default.
• W4212779932 cites W2160186510 @default.
• W4212779932 cites W3039698861 @default.
• W4212779932 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2021.03.020" @default.
• W4212779932 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
• W4212779932 type Work @default.
• W4212779932 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4212779932 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4212779932 hasAuthorship W4212779932A5018757309 @default.
• W4212779932 hasAuthorship W4212779932A5065857137 @default.
• W4212779932 hasAuthorship W4212779932A5088502721 @default.
• W4212779932 hasBestOaLocation W42127799321 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C17923572 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C23131810 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C2777698277 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C2778213512 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C2779464278 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C2780400711 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C500558357 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConcept C77350462 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C126322002 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C164705383 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C168563851 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C17923572 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C23131810 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C2777698277 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C2778213512 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C2779464278 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C2780400711 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C500558357 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C71924100 @default.
• W4212779932 hasConceptScore W4212779932C77350462 @default.
• W4212779932 hasIssue "7" @default.
• W4212779932 hasLocation W42127799321 @default.
• W4212779932 hasOpenAccess W4212779932 @default.
• W4212779932 hasPrimaryLocation W42127799321 @default.
• W4212779932 hasRelatedWork W2074910852 @default.
• W4212779932 hasRelatedWork W2085366694 @default.
• W4212779932 hasRelatedWork W2162409127 @default.
• W4212779932 hasRelatedWork W2396000345 @default.
• W4212779932 hasRelatedWork W2399063111 @default.
• W4212779932 hasRelatedWork W2581550094 @default.
• W4212779932 hasRelatedWork W2741873909 @default.
• W4212779932 hasRelatedWork W2795791984 @default.
• W4212779932 hasRelatedWork W2799397407 @default.
• W4212779932 hasRelatedWork W3023923059 @default.
• W4212779932 hasVolume "134" @default.
• W4212779932 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4212779932 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4212779932 workType "article" @default.