Evidence mapPaperPMID 36079090Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Comparison of the Treatment Efficacy of Rosuvastatin versus Atorvastatin Loading Prior to Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

Esraa M Adel, Ahmed A Elberry, Ahmed Abdel Aziz, Ibrahim A Naguib, Badrah S Alghamdi, Raghda R S Hussein

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Efficacy of single high-dose statin prior to percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2024
    Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Esraa M AdelNational Heart Institute, Cairo 12461, Egypt.ORCID 0000-0001-9822-849X
Ahmed A ElberryDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Pharmacy Program, Batterjee Medical College, Jeddah 21442, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-0073-3066
Ahmed Abdel AzizNational Heart Institute, Cairo 12461, Egypt.
Ibrahim A NaguibDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, College of Pharmacy, Taif University, Taif 21944, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-5923-1466
Badrah S AlghamdiNeuroscience Unit, Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 22252, Saudi Arabia.
Raghda R S HusseinDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Beni-Suef University, Beni-Suef 62514, Egypt.ORCID 0000-0002-0503-685X
Beni-Suef University · EGNational Heart Institute · EGKing Abdulaziz University · SATaif University · SA

Funding

Institutional Fund Project provided by Scientific Research (DSR), King Abdulaziz University (KAU), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (IFPDP-16-22)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of a single high-dose rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin preloading in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients receiving primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI.) Methods: A total of 99 patients presented with STEMI and were randomly divided into three groups—a control group (n = 33) with no statin treatment, an atorvastatin group (n = 33) with a single 80 mg atorvastatin dose and the rosuvastatin group (n = 33) with a single 40 mg rosuvastatin dose in the emergency room (ER) prior to PCI. Post-interventional thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade and corrected TIMI frame count (CTFC) were recorded, and ST-segment resolution was measured. Results: CTFC was significantly lower for the atorvastatin group (p-value < 0.01) than in the control group. A final TIMI flow grade 3 was achieved in 32 (97.0%) patients in the rosuvastatin group and 28 (84.8%) patients in the atorvastatin group compared with only 25 (75.8%) patients in the control group (p = 0.014). Peak CK-MB in the rosuvastatin group (263.2 [207.2−315.6]) and the atorvastatin group (208 [151.0−314.1]) was lower compared to that in the control group (398.4 [303.9−459.3]); p < 0.001. Conclusions: A single extensive dose of lipophilic atorvastatin prior to primary PCI in STEMI patients showed better improvement in microvascular myocardial perfusion compared to hydrophilic rosuvastatin.

Indexed as

atorvastatinhydrophiliclipophilicPCIrosuvastatinstatinSTEMI

Identifiers

PMID36079090
PMCPMC9457390
OpenAlexW4294307644

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.