Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34055929›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2021

Melatonin and Cardioprotection in Humans: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Alberto Domínguez-Rodríguez, Pedro Abreu-González, Néstor Báez-Ferrer, Russel J Reiter, Pablo Avanzas, Daniel Hernández-Vaquero

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Melatonin and retinal cell damage: molecular and biological functions.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2025
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Alberto Domínguez-RodríguezHospital Universitario de Canarias, Servicio de Cardiología, Tenerife, Spain.
Pedro Abreu-GonzálezDepartamento de Fisiología, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de La Laguna, Tenerife, San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Spain.
Néstor Báez-FerrerHospital Universitario de Canarias, Servicio de Cardiología, Tenerife, Spain.
Russel J ReiterDepartment of Cell Systems and Anatomy UT Health San Antonio, Long School of Medicine, San Antonio, TX, United States.
Pablo AvanzasÁrea del Corazón, Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias, Oviedo, Spain.
Daniel Hernández-VaqueroÁrea del Corazón, Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias, Oviedo, Spain.
Universidad de La Laguna · ESHospital Universitario Central de Asturias · ESHospital Universitario de Canarias · ESInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Principado de Asturias · ESThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Myocardial ischemia/reperfusion (IR) injury represents a critical problem associated with interventional approaches for coronary reperfusion. Pharmacological cardioprotective interventions are advocated to ameliorate IR injury. Melatonin is an anti-inflammatory and antioxidant agent with a wide range of therapeutic properties that may contribute to its cardioprotective effects. No systematic review or meta-analysis has compared melatonin vs. placebo as a cardioprotective agent in humans. The present study, based on a systematic review and meta-analysis, was carried out to assess melatonin's efficacy as a cardioprotective treatment. We performed a systematic review of the available literature. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified and information was extracted using predefined data extraction forms. The primary outcomes were (a) left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and (b) blood troponin levels in patients who underwent myocardial revascularization and were randomized to melatonin or placebo. The inverse-variance random-effects method was used to pool the estimates. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed. Weighted mean differences or standardized mean differences were calculated. A total of 283 records were screened and seven RCTs met all the inclusion criteria. After the pooled analysis, the results on LVEF were consistent across all studies, and a significant heterogeneity was found in the results on troponin levels. The melatonin-treated patients had on average higher LVEF than the placebo-treated individuals with a weighted mean difference = 3.1% (95% CI 0.6-5.5,

Indexed as

cardioprotection and ischemia-reperfusion injuryhumanmelatoninmeta-analysisrandomized controlled (clinical) trial

Identifiers

PMID34055929
PMCPMC8149621
OpenAlexW3160410258

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.