SynthesisVascular health and risk management2014
Postconditioning in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review, critical appraisal, and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in Vascular health and risk management, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effect of ischaemic postconditioning on markers of myocardial injury in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis.Open heart · 2024Pooled it
- Early discharge compared with ordinary discharge after percutaneous coronary intervention - a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and cost.Vascular health and risk management · 2017Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Controlling Reperfusion Injury With Controlled Reperfusion: Historical Perspectives and New Paradigms.Journal of cardiovascular pharmacology and therapeutics · 2021Review
- An overview of protective strategies against ischemia/reperfusion injury: The role of hyperbaric oxygen preconditioning.Brain and behavior · 2018Review
- Protein kinase C and cardiac dysfunction: a review.Heart failure reviews · 2017Review
- Novel cardioprotective and regenerative therapies in acute myocardial infarction: a review of recent and ongoing clinical trials.Future cardiology · 2016Review
- Sarcolemmal dependence of cardiac protection and stress-resistance: roles in aged or diseased hearts.British journal of pharmacology · 2016Review
- Ischaemic conditioning: pitfalls on the path to clinical translation.British journal of pharmacology · 2015Review
- The challenge of translating ischemic conditioning from animal models to humans: the role of comorbidities.Disease models & mechanisms · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to summarize the evidence from randomized clinical trials studies examining the efficacy of ischemic postconditioning (IPost) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction.
designThe study was a systematic review and critical appraisal, with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe searched the literature. A total of 21 randomized clinical trials were identified. Both fixed effect and random effects models were used to synthesize the results of individual studies. Heterogeneity between studies was examined by subgroup and random effects meta-regression analyses, considering ptient-related and study-level variables. Publication bias, or "small-study effect", was evaluated.
resultsSubstantial heterogeneity was present. The random effects model pooled estimate for the outcome infarct size assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance was estimated by the standardized mean difference (SMD) =-0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.34 to 0.21, ie, no effect of IPost. For the end point infarct size, estimated by biomarkers of myocardial necrosis, an overall pooled effect was SMD =-0.58, 95% CI: -0.96 to -0.19. This effect disappeared in powered and nonbiased studies (SMD =0.03, 95% CI: -0.48 to 0.55). Finally, for the outcome left ventricular ejection fraction, SMD =0.47 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.74. Unfortunately, selection bias (small-study effect) was present. For this outcome, the meta-regression showed that both presence of hypertension and the inclusion of nonbiased studies explained 28.3% of the heterogeneity among the studies. Simulation by the "trim and fill" method, which controlled for selection bias using random effects model, diluted the effect (SMD =0.17 95% CI: -0.13 to 0.48). No effects by IPost on ST-segment resolution or on the majority of adverse clinical events were observed during follow up, except the incidence of congestive heart failure was found.
conclusionEvidence from this study suggests no cardioprotection from IPost, on surrogate and the majority of clinical end points. A possible beneficial effect on the incidence of congestive heart failure needs to be replicated by a large clinical trial.
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.