ReviewCardiology research2013
Is There Still a Role for Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Antagonists in Acute Coronary Syndromes?
Review in Cardiology research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the effects of the GPIIb-IIIa antagonist Zalunfiban and the P2Y12 antagonist Selatogrel on Platelet Aggregation.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2023Article
- Mechanical and Pharmacological Revascularization Strategies for Prevention of Microvascular Dysfunction in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Analysis from Index of Microcirculatory Resistance Registry Data.Journal of interventional cardiology · 2020Article
- Radiolabeled tirofiban - a potential radiopharmaceutical for detection of deep venous thrombosis.Drug design, development and therapy · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The role played by glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitors has continuously evolved from the initial introduction in mid 90 s until the most recent guidelines for treating acute coronary syndromes, and competed with a wider use of ADP inhibitors and novel anticoagulant drugs, to the extent that they stepped down from class I to class II recommendation in the routine setting of acute coronary syndromes. As a consequence, GP IIb/IIIa use was greatly narrowed. The purpose of this review is to define the roles that GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors may still have in acute ischemic settings by explaining why in high risk patients they might be preferable and/or whether they might be added to ADP inhibitors also emphasizing the underlying mechanistic actions. It is concluded that there might be a more extensive use of GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes, strictly based on the definition for a high risk procedure: complexity, angiographic characteristics and patient's risk profile, regardless whether STEMI or NSTEMI. The positive elements one should appreciate in GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors are: efficacy, rapid onset and reversibility of action, absence of pharmacogenomic variability, pharmacoeconomic considerations and the possibility of intracoronary administration.
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.