ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2019
Short term outcome following acute phase switch among P2Y
Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2019. 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 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.
- Abatement of potent P2Y12 antagonist-based dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary intervention: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Application effect of evidence-based nursing in perioperative period of acute coronary syndrome.American journal of translational research · 2021Article
- Does the level of myocardial injury differ in primary angioplasty patients loaded first with clopidogrel and the ones with ticagrelor?Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2020Article
- Pleiotropic actions of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel - Do molecular differences translate into superior clinical efficacy after myocardial infarction?International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe efficacy and safety of switching P2Y
methodsMEDLINE/PubMed/SCOPUS/Cochrane databases were screened for studies regarding switching of P2Y
results22,500 patients from 14 studies were included. Unstable angina/non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (62.0%, interquartile range, 52.8%-68.0%) was the most common clinical presentation. The total number switched was 4294 (19.1%); escalation in 3416 (79.5%) patients (from clopidogrel to prasugrel, 62.9%) and de-escalation in 18.5%. Pooled analysis revealed no significant differences in MACE for any comparison; risk of bleeding was significantly increased among switched patients overall (odds ratio [OR], 1.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-2.10) and increased in the escalation group (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.06-2.16).
conclusionsAmong patients presenting with ACS, switching from one P2Y
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.