Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39416642›Full record

ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2024

Effectiveness of different tirofiban administration times in patients with no-reflow myocardial infarction during percutaneous coronary intervention.

Chaosheng Mei, Huiping Yu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Chaosheng MeiChaosheng Mei, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hanyang Hospital affiliated to Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei Province 430050, P.R. China.
Huiping YuHuiping Yu, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hanyang Hospital affiliated to Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei Province 430050, P.R. China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of different tirofiban administration time windows in patients with no-reflow myocardial infarction (MI) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: This single centre retrospective observational study included patients with no-reflow MI, undergoing PCI at the Hanyang Hospital affiliated to Wuhan University of Science and Technology from March 2020 to May 2023. All patients were administered tirofiban. Patients who received tirofiban with postinterventional thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow ≥ 1 were grouped as Group-I, and patients who were directly given tirofiban through the guiding catheter without forward blood flow were grouped as Group-II. TIMI blood flow classification, levels of cardiac troponin T (cTnT) and creatine kinase isoenzyme MB (CK-MB), incidence of complications and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in the two groups before and after the treatment were statistically analyzed. Results: A total of 156 patients were included in this study, including 79 patients in Group-I and 77 patients in Group-II. There was no significant difference in the baseline data between the two groups (P>0.05). After treatment, TIMI blood flow classification of the two groups improved and was significantly better in Group-I compared to Group-II ( Conclusions: Compared with the direct application of tirofiban, tirofiban given when TIMI Grade≥ 1 for patients with no-reflow MI during PCI can more effectively regulate the blood flow status of target vessels, reduce myocardial injury, and reduce the risk of MACE.

Indexed as

No-reflow myocardial infarctionPercutaneous coronary interventiontime windowsTirofiban

Identifiers

PMID39416642
PMCPMC11476159

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.