SynthesisPloS one2016
Statins Have No Additional Benefit for Pulmonary Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative effectiveness of statins for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with pulmonary hypertension: systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Simvastatin and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate effects against hypoxic pulmonary hypertension are not additive.Physiological research · 2022Article
- Efficacy and safety of statin therapy in pulmonary hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Article
- Statins may be beneficial for patients with pulmonary hypertension secondary to lung diseases.Journal of thoracic disease · 2017Article
- Reactive Oxygen and Nitrogen Species in the Development of Pulmonary Hypertension.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe performed a meta-analysis to explore the effects of adding statins to standard treatment on adult patients of pulmonary hypertension (PH).
methodsA systematic search up to December, 2015 of Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed to identify randomized controlled trials with PH patients treated with statins.
resultsFive studies involving 425 patients were included into this meta-analysis. The results of our analysis showed that the statins can't significantly increase 6-minute walking distance (6MWD, mean difference [MD] = -0.33 [CI: -18.25 to 17.59]), decrease the BORG dyspnea score (MD = -0.72 [CI: -2.28 to 0.85]), the clinical worsening risk (11% in statins vs. 10.1% in controls, Risk ratio = 1.06 [CI: 0.61, 1.83]), or the systolic pulmonary arterial pressure (SPAP) (MD = -0.72 [CI: -2.28 to 0.85]). Subgroup analysis for PH due to COPD or non-COPD also showed no significance.
conclusionsStatins have no additional beneficial effect on standard therapy for PH, but the results from subgroup of PH due to COPD seem intriguing and further study with larger sample size and longer follow-up is suggested.
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.