Trial reportClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2021
Clopidogrel vs. prasugrel vs. ticagrelor in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a pooled IABP-SHOCK II and CULPRIT-SHOCK trial sub-analysis.
Trial report in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antiplatelet therapy in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2025Review
- Clopidogrel vs. ticagrelor in ST-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock undergoing primary PCI : Findings from a National, multicenter registry.Thrombosis journal · 2025Article
- Potent P2YCritical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Mechanisms and recent advances in non-coding RNAs and RNA modifications in antiplatelet drug resistance.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Review
- Cangrelor versus crushed ticagrelor in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: rationale and design of the randomised, double-blind DAPT-SHOCK-AMI trial.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
- Optimal Antithrombotic Strategies in Cardiogenic Shock.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Clopidogrel, ticagrelor, prasugrel or an alternation of two P2Y12 in patients with acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 11 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe aim of this pooled sub-analysis of the Intraaortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock II (IABP-SHOCK II) and Culprit Lesion Only PCI versus Multivessel PCI in Cardiogenic Shock (CULPRIT-SHOCK) trial was to compare the clinical outcome of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock treated either with clopidogrel or the newer, more potent ADP-receptor antagonists prasugrel or ticagrelor. METHODS AND
resultsFor the current analysis the primary endpoint was 1-year mortality and the secondary safety endpoint was moderate or severe bleedings until hospital discharge with respect to three different ADP-receptor antagonists. 856 patients were eligible for analysis. Of these, 507 patients (59.2%) received clopidogrel, 178 patients (20.8%) prasugrel and 171 patients (20.0%) ticagrelor as acute antiplatelet therapy. The adjusted rate of mortality after 1-year did not differ significantly between prasugrel and clopidogrel (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60-1.09, p
conclusionThis pooled sub-analysis is the largest analysis on safety and efficacy of three oral ADP-receptor antagonists and shows that acute therapy with either clopidogrel, prasugrel or ticagrelor is no independent predictor of 1-year mortality. Treatment with ticagrelor seems independently associated with less in-hospital moderate and severe bleeding events compared to clopidogrel. This finding might be due to selection bias and should be interpreted with caution.
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.