Evidence mapPaperPMID 35780089Full record

Trial reportBMC cardiovascular disorders2022

Assessment of myocardial salvage in patients with STEMI undergoing thrombolysis: ticagrelor versus clopidogrel.

Stylianos Petousis, Michalis Hamilos, Konstantinos Pagonidis, Panos Vardas, Georgios Lazopoulos, Ioannis Anastasiou, Evangelos Zacharis, George Kochiadakis, Emmanouil Skalidis

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Stylianos PetousisCardiology Department, University Hospital of Heraklion, Voutes and Stavrakia, 71110, Heraklion, Crete, Greece. sgpetousis@gmail.com.
Michalis HamilosCardiology Department, University Hospital of Heraklion, Voutes and Stavrakia, 71110, Heraklion, Crete, Greece.
Konstantinos PagonidisCardiology Department, University Hospital of Heraklion, Voutes and Stavrakia, 71110, Heraklion, Crete, Greece.
Panos VardasSchool of Medicine, University of Crete, Heraklion, Greece.
Georgios LazopoulosSchool of Medicine, University of Crete, Heraklion, Greece.
Ioannis AnastasiouCardiology Department, University Hospital of Heraklion, Voutes and Stavrakia, 71110, Heraklion, Crete, Greece.
Evangelos ZacharisCardiology Department, University Hospital of Heraklion, Voutes and Stavrakia, 71110, Heraklion, Crete, Greece.
George KochiadakisCardiology Department, University Hospital of Heraklion, Voutes and Stavrakia, 71110, Heraklion, Crete, Greece.
Emmanouil SkalidisCardiology Department, University Hospital of Heraklion, Voutes and Stavrakia, 71110, Heraklion, Crete, Greece.
University Hospital of Heraklion · GRUniversity of Crete · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the setting of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the faster and stronger antiplatelet action of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel, as well as its pleiotropic effects, could result in a greater degree of cardioprotection and final infarct size (FIS) limitation. The aim of our study was to comparatively evaluate the effect of ticagrelor and clopidogrel on myocardial salvage index (MSI) in STEMI patients undergoing thrombolysis.

methodsForty-two STEMI patients treated with thrombolysis were randomized to receive clopidogrel (n = 21) or ticagrelor (n = 21), along with aspirin. Myocardial area at risk (AAR) was calculated according to the BARI and the APPROACH jeopardy scores. FIS was quantified by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) performed 5-6 months post-randomization. MSI was calculated as (AAR-FIS)/AAR × 100%. Primary endpoint of our study was MSI. Secondary endpoints were FIS and CMR-derived left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at 5 -6 months post-randomization.

resultsBy using the BARI score for AAR calculation, mean MSI was 52.25 ± 30.5 for the clopidogrel group and 54.29 ± 31.08 for the ticagrelor group (p = 0.83), while mean MSI using the APPROACH score was calculated at 51.94 ± 30 and 53.09 ± 32.39 (p = 0.9), respectively. Median CMR-derived FIS-as a percentage of LV-was 10.7% ± 8.25 in the clopidogrel group and 12.09% ± 8.72 in the ticagrelor group (p = 0.6). Mean LVEF at 5-6 months post-randomization did not differ significantly between randomization groups.

conclusionsOur results suggest that the administration of ticagrelor in STEMI patients undergoing thrombolysis offer a similar degree of myocardial salvage, compared to clopidogrel.

Indexed as

Myocardial InfarctionST Elevation Myocardial InfarctionClopidogrelHumansStroke VolumeThrombolytic TherapyTicagrelorVentricular Function, LeftClopidogrelTicagrelorClopidogrelMyocardial salvageSTEMIThrombolysisTicagrelor

Identifiers

PMID35780089
PMCPMC9250208
OpenAlexW4283772046

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.