SynthesisClinical cardiology2026
Moderate Intensity Statins Plus Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus High Intensity Statins Monotherapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-intensity statins are standard therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS), yet tolerability concerns and residual cardiovascular risk remain important challenges. Moderate-intensity statin therapy combined with ezetimibe has emerged as a potential alternative, although its comparative effectiveness after PCI remains uncertain.
methodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched through September 2025 for studies enrolling adults undergoing PCI and comparing moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe therapy with high-intensity statin therapy. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and revascularization. Secondary outcomes included individual cardiovascular endpoints and safety outcomes such as new-onset diabetes and rhabdomyolysis. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RRs).
resultsNine studies involving 179 621 patients were included, the majority being observational studies. No significant difference was observed in MACE between treatment strategies (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.81-1.12). Modest reductions were observed in cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71-0.98) and MI (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.95), although findings were non-robust with wide prediction intervals. Revascularization rates were similar between groups. Subgroup analyses suggested lower heterogeneity in intermediate follow-up and non-ACS populations.
conclusionsModerate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe therapy may provide cardiovascular outcomes comparable to high-intensity statins after PCI. However, persistent heterogeneity limits certainty, and large randomized trials are needed to confirm long-term efficacy and safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.