SynthesisIndian heart journal
Administration of low molecular weight and unfractionated heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention.
Synthesis in Indian heart journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Precision percutaneous coronary intervention.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2026Review
- Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin-Functionalized Chitosan-Chondroitin Sulfate Hydrogels for Controlled Release of TGF-β3 andFrontiers in chemistry · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review with meta-analysis sought to determine the efficacy and safety of unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) on clinical outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention. Medline, Embase, Elsevier, and web of knowledge as well as Google scholar literature were used for selecting appropriate studies with randomized controlled design. After screening 445 studies, a total of 23 trials (including a total of 43,912 patients) were identified that reported outcomes. Pooled analysis revealed that LMWH compared to UFH could significantly increase thrombolysis in myocardial infarction grade 3 flow (p<0.001), which was associated with similar target vessel revascularization (p=0.6), similar incidence of stroke (p=0.7), and significantly lower incidence of re-myocardial infarction (p<0.001), major bleeding (p=0.02) and mortality (p<0.001). Overall, LMWH was shown to be a useful type of heparin for patients with MI undergoing PCI, due to its higher efficacy and lower rate of complication compared to UFH. It is also associated with increased myocardial perfusion, decreased major hemorrhage, and mortality.
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.