[Magnesium treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction. A meta-analysis].

What Was Tested

The paper reports a study of Magnesium, published as a randomized controlled trial.

The object of the study was to investigate the effect of intravenous magnesium in acute myocardial infarction.

Why It Was Studied

The subjects were 2438 patients with acute myocardial infarction in nine blind randomized trials combined in a meta-analysis and 54,822 patients in one unblinded randomized multi-centre trial.

The main outcome measure was the relative chance of survival and relative chance of avoiding ventricular tachyarrhythmia.

Who Took Part

The study group was 2438 patients.

PubMed tags the participants as both men and women.

It was carried out as an overview of available randomized trials in which patients were allocated to receive either magnesium or placebo, the trials having taken place in the coronary care units of several hospitals.

How the Study Was Run

In design terms this was a randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled study.

The patients were allocated by chance, so the Magnesium group and the comparison group should start out alike.

Blinding on both sides kept the patients and researchers unaware of who received Magnesium.

The comparison arm used a placebo, so changes seen with Magnesium could be set against what happens without it.

What Was Measured

The main outcome measure was the relative chance of survival and relative chance of avoiding ventricular tachyarrhythmia.

Topics PubMed links to this paper include Magnesium, Myocardial Infarction and Prognosis.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled study of Magnesium in 2438 patients.

With several hundred people or more, it is a fairly large study for this kind of research.

The publication is from 1995 (Ugeskrift for laeger), a journal based in Denmark.

More context: the related Vitamin D, K2, Magnesium and Zinc library page, all human trials.