Can nicorandil treat angina pectoris effectively?

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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

1. Expert consensus document: A 'diamond' approach to personalized treatment of angina.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2018
   Guideline
2. Relief of Ischemia in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.Current cardiology reports · 2021
   Review
3. Stable Angina Medical Therapy Management Guidelines: A Critical Review of Guidelines from the European Society of Cardiology and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.European cardiology · 2019
   Review
4. Drug Therapy for Stable Angina Pectoris.Drugs · 2017
   Review
5. Selection of optimal therapy for chronic stable angina.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2006
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Impact of nicorandil in angina: subgroup analyses.2004

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.