This is the old version of SRDR. The next, SRDRplus is available! Registration of your SRDRPlus account is free and approval is automatic. Click Here to register an SRDRPlus account.

Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Low levels of serum n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids are associated with worse heart failure-free survival in patients after acute myocardial infarction.



Key Questions Addressed
2 Observational studies (longitudinal; quantile or continuous analysis)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Low levels of serum n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids are associated with worse heart failure-free survival in patients after acute myocardial infarction.
Author Hara M., Sakata Y., Nakatani D., Suna S., Usami M., Matsumoto S., Hamasaki T., Doi Y., Nishino M., Sato H., Kitamura T., Nanto S., Hori M., Komuro I.
Country Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan.
Year 2013
Numbers Pubmed ID: 23047296

Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.


Extraction Form: Observational Studies
Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Study Design Observational: Prospective, longitudinal study of intake (eg, FFQ, biomarker)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the name of this study? (e.g. DART, Physician's Health Study) OACIS
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country in which study conducted (where subjects live) Japan
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Funding source No industry relationship reported (funding or affiliations reported)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Eligibility Criteria: Patients with AMI who were registered in the OACIS between January 2006 and December 2009 and who were discharged alive and whose blood samples were collected at least 10 days after the onset of AMI and within 14 days before and after discharge
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study Population Secondary Prevention (history of CVD event)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comment about study design: Consecutive patients
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
At baseline, did all subjects have (per eligibility criteria)...? ... Define: Other ... Acute MI
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Conflict of interest No conflict of interest (explicitly stated)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Does the study report a subgroup or predictor (regression) analysis for an outcome of interest? ... Which subgroups/predictors? Yes ... age, sex, DM, HTN, dyslipidemia, LDL levels, HDL levels, TG levels, GFR levels, statin use, ACEi/ARB use, beta blocker use
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What type(s) of analysis is/are reported? Baseline biomarker level vs. outcomes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study start date(s) 2006
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Male, percent 77.8
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Race nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Dropouts, withdrawals, etc. nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Baseline characteristics, continuous 65
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
57,73
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
191
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mg/dL
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
163,222
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
122
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mg/dL
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
100,147
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
44
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mg/dL
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
38,52
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
98
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mg/dL
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
60,153
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
23.9
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
22.1,26.1
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Baseline Diseases/Conditions 35.1
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
50.8
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
67.0
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
100
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
n3 Source Diet (Total)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons

No Results found.

Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
Selection bias (NOT NESTED CASE CONTROL): Is there clear demonstration that the outcome of interest was not present at the start of the study (baseline)? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparability/Adjustment (ALL OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES): Were the analyses adjusted for confounders (or other factors)? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Outcome assessment (ALL STUDIES): Were OUTCOME ASSESSORS adequately BLINDED? Unclear
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data (ALL STUDIES) Low
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Nutrition, FFQ Baseline intake: Was the dietary assessment instrument (eg, FFQ) described to have measured n-3 FA (ALL STUDIES WITH FFQ)?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Nutrition, Baseline data: Were the ranges or distributions of the nutrient exposures adequately reported (ie, quantile means/medians SD and/or ranges) (ALL OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES)? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Additional Bias: Bias due to problems not covered elsewhere in the table. No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Do any specific outcomes have a high risk of bias (different than others)? If so, describe in Notes. No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.