ArticleIranian journal of public health2018
Comparison of Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel for Patients Undergoing Emergency Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.
Article in Iranian journal of public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Redefining haemostasis: Role of rotational thromboelastometry in critical care settings.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025Review
- The Use of Thromboelastography in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Acute Coronary Syndrome in East Asia: A Systematic Literature Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe compared treatments with the antiplatelets ticagrelor and clopidogrel used in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the perioperative period for emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
methodsA total of 120 patients were selected and randomly divided into control and observation groups (60 patients in each) from 2014-2016 at The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University. The patients in the control group received 300 mg clopidogrel and 300 mg aspirin for oral administration, while those in the observation group were given 180 mg ticagrelor and 300 mg aspirin orally prior to the PCI. During the operation, heparinization and a tirofiban micro-pump were used continuously.
resultsCoronary artery and peripheral venous blood were extracted from each patient to obtain various parameters of thrombelastogram (TEG), and the maximum platelet aggregation rates in order to compare antiplatelet effects. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were recorded during the following 6-month follow-up. Analysis of the data showed no differences in terms of the time span between medication intake and stent implantation, or the dosage of heparin and tirofiban used between the two groups. Before stent implantation, and 24 and 48 h after the procedure the average R and K values of TEG in coronary artery blood and peripheral venous blood samples in the observation group were longer than those in the control group, while the α angle, MA, CI, MARAA and MARADP values were lower (
conclusionTicagrelor can improve antiplatelet treatment for patients with AMI during the perioperative period of emergency PCI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30181992PMC6119568W2892052572What 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.