The impact of oral nicorandil pre-treatment on ST resolution and clinical outcome of patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary coronary angioplasty: A randomized placebo controlled trial.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Evaluation of the effect of trans sodium crocetinate and crocetin on reperfusion injury in acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial.Avicenna journal of phytomedicine · 2026
   Article
2. The effect of nicorandil compared to placebo on cardiac outcomes of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2025
   Review

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as