Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27164905›Full record

ReviewBasic research in cardiology2016

9th Hatter Biannual Meeting: position document on ischaemia/reperfusion injury, conditioning and the ten commandments of cardioprotection.

R M Bell, H E Bøtker, R D Carr, S M Davidson, J M Downey, D P Dutka, G Heusch, B Ibanez, R Macallister, C Stoppe and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Basic research in cardiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
12.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Mitochondrial Kinase Signaling for Cardioprotection.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Do We Really Need Aspirin Loading for STEMI?Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2022
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

14 authors at 9 institutions in 6 countries.

R M BellThe Hatter Cardiovascular Institute, Institute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, 67 Chenies Mews, London, WC1E 6HX, UK.
H E BøtkerDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
R D CarrThe Hatter Cardiovascular Institute, Institute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, 67 Chenies Mews, London, WC1E 6HX, UK.
S M DavidsonThe Hatter Cardiovascular Institute, Institute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, 67 Chenies Mews, London, WC1E 6HX, UK.
J M DowneyDepartment of Physiology, University of South Alabama College of Medicine, Mobile, AL, USA.
D P DutkaDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK.
G HeuschInstitute for Pathophysiology, West German Heart and Vascular Center, University of Essen Medical School, Essen, Germany.
B IbanezCentro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III (CNIC), Madrid, Spain.
R MacallisterCentre for Clinical Pharmacology, University College London, London, UK.
C StoppeDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
M OvizeCentre de recherche en Cancérologie de Lyon, Université Lyon, Lyon, France.
A RedingtonDepartment of Pediatric Cardiology, the Heart Institute at Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
J M WalkerThe Hatter Cardiovascular Institute, Institute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, 67 Chenies Mews, London, WC1E 6HX, UK.
D M YellonThe Hatter Cardiovascular Institute, Institute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, 67 Chenies Mews, London, WC1E 6HX, UK. d.yellon@ucl.ac.uk.
University College London · GBAarhus University Hospital · DKAddenbrooke's Hospital · GBCincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center · USSpanish National Centre for Cardiovascular Research · ESUniversitätsklinikum Aachen · DEUniversité Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FRUniversity of South Alabama · USWest German Heart and Vascular Center Essen · DE

Funding

British Heart Foundation PG/09/106/28142British Heart Foundation PG/15/52/31598Medical Research Council MR/K002066/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the 30 years since the original description of ischaemic preconditioning, understanding of the pathophysiology of ischaemia/reperfusion injury and concepts of cardioprotection have been revolutionised. In the same period of time, management of patients with coronary artery disease has also been transformed: coronary artery and valve surgery are now deemed routine with generally excellent outcomes, and the management of acute coronary syndromes has seen decade on decade reductions in cardiovascular mortality. Nonetheless, despite these improvements, cardiovascular disease and ischaemic heart disease in particular, remain the leading cause of death and a significant cause of long-term morbidity (with a concomitant increase in the incidence of heart failure) worldwide. The need for effective cardioprotective strategies has never been so pressing. However, despite unequivocal evidence of the existence of ischaemia/reperfusion in animal models providing a robust rationale for study in man, recent phase 3 clinical trials studying a variety of cardioprotective strategies in cardiac surgery and acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction have provided mixed results. The investigators meeting at the Hatter Cardiovascular Institute workshop describe the challenge of translating strong pre-clinical data into effective clinical intervention strategies in patients in whom effective medical therapy is already altering the pathophysiology of ischaemia/reperfusion injury-and lay out a clearly defined framework for future basic and clinical research to improve the chances of successful translation of strong pre-clinical interventions in man.

Indexed as

Myocardial Reperfusion InjuryTranslational Research, BiomedicalAnimalsHumansIschemic Preconditioning, MyocardialApoptosisAsprinAutophagyBasic researchBeta blockersCABGCardiac surgeryClinical trialsConditioningCyclosporineDNAInfarctionInjuryIschaemiaIschaemicMetoprololMitochondrial transition poreNecroptosisNecrosisOpiatesp2y12PostconditioningPre-clinicalPreconditioningPyroptosisReperfusionRISK pathwaySAFE pathwayStatinsValve replacement

Identifiers

PMID27164905
PMCPMC4863033
OpenAlexW2400326200

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.