Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25720581›Full record

ArticleBasic research in cardiology2015

Cyclosporine A reduces microvascular obstruction and preserves left ventricular function deterioration following myocardial ischemia and reperfusion.

Jaroslaw Zalewski, Piet Claus, Jan Bogaert, Nina Vanden Driessche, Ronald B Driesen, Diogo T Galan, Karin R Sipido, Piotr Buszman, Krzysztof Milewski, Frans Van de Werf

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Basic research in cardiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05691764 (Effect of Cyclosporine and Remote Ischemic Preconditioning on MDA, Calcium Cytosol Concentration, and Mitochondrial Edema in Reperfusion Ischemia Injury), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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.

NCT05691764 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Effect of Cyclosporine and Remote Ischemic Preconditioning on MDA, Calcium Cytosol Concentration, and Mitochondrial Edema in Reperfusion Ischemia Injury: Research on Tetralogy Fallot Patients With Correction Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorIndonesia UniversityRan2020 to 2022Enrolled40ConditionsMyocardial Injury, Cardiac SurgeryArmsCyclosporin, remote ischemic preconditioning, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jaroslaw ZalewskiCardiology, Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium, jzalews@szpitaljp2.krakow.pl.
Piet Claus
Jan Bogaert
Nina Vanden Driessche
Ronald B Driesen
Diogo T Galan
Karin R Sipido
Piotr Buszman
Krzysztof Milewski
Frans Van de Werf
KU Leuven · BEAmerican Heart of Poland · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Postconditioning and cyclosporine A prevent mitochondrial permeability transition pore opening providing cardioprotection during ischemia/reperfusion. Whether microvascular obstruction is affected by these interventions is largely unknown. Pigs subjected to coronary occlusion for 1 h followed by 3 h of reperfusion were assigned to control (n = 8), postconditioning (n = 9) or cyclosporine A intravenous infusion 10-15 min before the end of ischemia (n = 8). Postconditioning was induced by 8 cycles of repeated 30-s balloon inflation and deflation. After 3 h of reperfusion magnetic resonance imaging, triphenyltetrazolium chloride/Evans blue staining and histopathology were performed. Microvascular obstruction (MVO, percentage of gadolinium-hyperenhanced area) was measured early (3 min) and late (12 min) after contrast injection. Infarct size with double staining was smaller in cyclosporine (46.2 ± 3.1%, P = 0.016) and postconditioning pigs (47.6 ± 3.9%, P = 0.008) versus controls (53.8 ± 4.1%). Late MVO was significantly reduced by cyclosporine (13.9 ± 9.6%, P = 0.047) but not postconditioning (23.6 ± 11.7%, P = 0.66) when compared with controls (32.0 ± 16.9%). Myocardial blood flow in the late MVO was improved with cyclosporine versus controls (0.30 ± 0.06 vs 0.21 ± 0.03 ml/g/min, P = 0.002) and was inversely correlated with late-MVO extent (R(2) = 0.93, P < 0.0001). Deterioration of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) between baseline and 3 h of reperfusion was smaller with cyclosporine (-7.9 ± 2.4%, P = 0.008) but not postconditioning (-12.0 ± 5.5%, P = 0.22) when compared with controls (-16.4 ± 5.5%). In the three groups, infarct size (β = -0.69, P < 0.001) and late MVO (β = -0.33, P = 0.02) were independent predictors of LVEF deterioration following ischemia/reperfusion (R(2) = 0.73, P < 0.001). Despite both cyclosporine A and postconditioning reduce infarct size, only cyclosporine A infusion had a beneficial effect on microvascular damage and was associated with better preserved LV function when compared with controls.

Indexed as

AnimalsCyclosporineDisease Models, AnimalEnzyme InhibitorsFemaleIschemic PostconditioningMaleMyocardial InfarctionMyocardial Reperfusion InjurySwineCyclosporineEnzyme Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID25720581
PMCPMC4342514
OpenAlexW2066968019

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.