Key result
Military status was not associated with a difference in 1-year major adverse cardiac events compared to non-military men following successful PCI (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.88-1.16; p=0.872).
Why the study?
Does military status affect the risk of major adverse cardiac events in men undergoing successful percutaneous coronary intervention?
Cohort (n=2,292)
Does military status affect the risk of major adverse cardiac events in men undergoing successful percutaneous coronary intervention?
Despite differences in baseline characteristics and clinical presentation, military and non-military men have similar 1-year clinical outcomes after successful PCI.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No excess 1-year MACE after PCI by military status; leaves open need for veteran-specific care pathways.
OBJECTIVES: Living in a military environment, as a unique job and lifestyle, may affect the physical and mental status of military personnel. Coronary artery disease (CAD) status and outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in military personnel as a unique part of each society are less investigated. METHOD: In a registry-based study, data of 338 military men and 1954 non-military men who underwent successful PCI from March 2012 to March 2013 were analysed. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) after hospital discharge during 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: Military men were significantly younger and had a higher frequency of hypertension, familial history of CAD and cigarette smoking. Other risk factors were more prevalent in non-military men. PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and lower left ventricular ejection fraction were also more prevalent in soldiers. After mean follow-up duration of 12.3 months, MACE that was defined as the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularisation was similar in both groups (HR=1.01 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.16); p=0.872). By adjustment for confounding factors, results were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Although there are a number of differences in basic and procedural characteristics between military and non-military men who underwent PCI, 1-year clinical outcomes of this procedure are not different in these patient groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Joharimoghadam et al. (2017) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease requiring PCI (n=2,292). Military status vs. Non-military status was evaluated on Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) after hospital discharge during 1-year follow-up (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.88-1.16, p=0.872). Military status was not associated with a difference in 1-year major adverse cardiac events compared to non-military men following successful PCI (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.88-1.16; p=0.872).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: