Initial Aspirin Dose and Outcome Among ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Treated With Fibrinolytic Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although treatment with immediate aspirin reduces morbidity and mortality in ST-elevation myocardial infarction, the optimal dose is unclear. We therefore compared the acute mortality and bleeding risks associated with the initial use of 162 versus 325 mg aspirin in fibrinolytic-treated ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using combined data from the Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO I) and Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO III) trials (n=48 422 ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients), we compared the association between initial aspirin dose of 162 versus 325 mg and 24-hour and 7-day mortality, as well as rates of in-hospital moderate/severe bleeding. Results were adjusted for previously identified mortality and bleeding risk factors. Overall, 24.4% of patients (n=11 828) received an initial aspirin dose of 325 mg, and 75.6% (n=36 594) received 162 mg. The 24-hour mortality rates were 2.9% versus 2.8% (P=0.894) for those receiving an initial aspirin dose of 325 versus 162 mg. Mortality rates at 7 and 30 days were 5.2% versus 4.9% (P=0.118) and 7.1% versus 6.5% (P=0.017) among patients receiving the 325 versus 162 mg aspirin. After adjustment, aspirin dose was not associated with 24-hour (odds ratio [OR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.25), 7-day (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.17), or 30-day (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.12) mortality rates. No significant difference was noted for myocardial infarction or the composite of death or myocardial infarction between groups. In-hospital moderate/severe bleeding occurred in 9.3% of those treated with 325 mg versus 12.2% among those receiving 162 mg (P<0.001). After adjustment, 325 mg was associated with a significant increase in moderate/severe bleeding (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.24; P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that an initial dose of 162 mg aspirin may be as effective as and perhaps safer than 325 mg for the acute treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".