SynthesisHerz2020
Efficacy of liraglutide intervention in myocardial infarction : A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Herz, 2020. 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 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analyses of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in acute myocardial infarction.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2026Review
- Liraglutide does not increase heart rate of diabetic patients during acute myocardial infarction.Journal of diabetes · 2024Observational
- Cardiovascular effects of antiobesity drugs: are the new medicines all the same?International journal of obesity supplements · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe efficacy of liraglutide intervention for myocardial infarction (MI) remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of liraglutide intervention versus placebo on cardiac function for MI.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases through April 2018 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of liraglutide intervention versus placebo on MI. This meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model.
resultsFour randomized controlled trials involving 469 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control group for MI, liraglutide intervention significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction (mean difference [MD] = 4.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] =1.71 to 7.14; P = 0.001), superoxide dismutase (MD = 6.89; 95% CI = 1.80 to 11.98; P = 0.008), and decreased high-sensitivity C‑reactive protein (MD = -0.21; 95% CI = -0.33 to -0.09; P = 0.0006), but had no remarkable influence on major adverse cardiovascular events (risk ratio = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.28-1.09; P = 0.09), recurrence of MI (risk ratio = 0.50; 95% CI = 0.19-1.30; P = 0.16), repeated revascularization (risk ratio = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.17-1.42; P = 0.19), and cardiac death (risk ratio = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.12-2.73; P = 0.48).
conclusionsLiraglutide intervention is associated with significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction and superoxide dismutase, reduced high-sensitivity C‑reactive protein in patients with MI, but has no remarkable impact on major adverse cardiovascular events, recurrence of MI, repeated revascularization or cardiac death.
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.