Why the study?
Do secondary prevention therapies reduce reinfarction and death in survivors of myocardial infarction?
Do secondary prevention therapies reduce reinfarction and death in survivors of myocardial infarction?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A review of secondary prevention trials after MI indicates that while some therapies are beneficial, others may have deleterious effects.
MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION (MI) is a major sequela of coronary artery disease and carries an adverse prognosis for life. Each year more than 1 million Americans suffer from MI, and about 70% survive the acute event. The survivors of MI remain at risk for reinfarction and death. The subsequent prognosis of these patients is related to the extent and location of MI, left ventricular dysfunction, arrhythmia, and residual ischemia. Several large clinical trials have been conducted in an effort to alter the prognosis after MI. These trials have evaluated effects of calcium-channel blockers,¹⁻¹²β-blockers,¹³⁻²⁴nitrates,²⁵⁻²⁷antiplatelet therapy, antiarrhythmic drugs,²⁸⁻³⁰risk factor modification,³¹⁻³⁵and myocardial revascularization. Of these, only a few have demonstrated beneficial effects in the period after MI. Actually, some studies¹⁻⁸,²⁸⁻³⁰have shown deleterious effects of treatment used for secondary prevention. The results of the second Secondary Prevention Reinfarction Israel Nifedipine Trial (SPRINT 2)
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Prakash Deedwania (1993) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: