ArticleAmerican heart journal2011
Temporal trends and practice variations in clopidogrel loading doses in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry.
Article in American heart journal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical characteristics and outcomes of young adults with first myocardial infarction: Results from Gulf COAST.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2020Article
- Predicting Likelihood for Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting After Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Finding the Best Prediction Model.The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2016Article
- Variation in Practice Regarding Pretreatment With Dual Antiplatelet Therapy for Patients With Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA higher loading dose of clopidogrel achieves a more rapid and consistent degree of platelet inhibition than standard dosing, although the clinical benefit of higher doses has not been clearly established. The use of the different doses in clinical practice is not known. We evaluated the patient, procedural, and hospital characteristics associated clopidogrel loading doses given to patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).
methodsThe National Cardiovascular Data Registry ACTION Get With the Guidelines Registry was queried for patients with NSTEMI admitted from 2007 to 2008. Demographic, clinical, and procedural information were collected on standardized data forms. Patients were categorized according to the clopidogrel loading dose received. Temporal trends in the use of different doses were evaluated in quarterly time intervals.
resultsBetween January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2008, the use of a 600-mg clopidogrel loading dose increased steadily from 36.4% to 45.5%, whereas the use of 300 mg decreased slightly from 40.1% to 37.1%. Patients loaded with clopidogrel before cardiac catheterization were more likely to receive 300 mg, whereas those receiving a loading dose at the time of catheterization more often received 600 mg. The temporal increase in the use of 600 mg clopidogrel loading doses was not explained by temporal changes in periprocedural loading, use of early invasive management of patients with NSTEMI, or use of antithrombotics or glycoprotein 2b/3a inhibitors.
conclusionsHigher loading dose clopidogrel increased between 2007 and 2008. Higher-dose clopidogrel was more frequently used in lower-risk patients undergoing an early invasive strategy and receiving periprocedural loading.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.