ReviewCardiovascular drugs and therapy2022
Do We Really Need Aspirin Loading for STEMI?
Review in Cardiovascular drugs and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Aspirin loading in coronary artery disease patients already taking aspirin: A systematic review.Journal of cardiovascular and thoracic research · 2025Review
- Initial Despair and Current Hope of Identifying a Clinically Useful Treatment of Myocardial Reperfusion Injury: Insights Derived from Studies of Platelet P2YInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Do We Still Need Aspirin in Coronary Artery Disease?Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Platelet-Mediated Transfer of Cardioprotection by Remote Ischemic Conditioning and Its Abrogation by Aspirin But Not by Ticagrelor.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 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
9 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aspirin loading (chewable or intravenous) as soon as possible after presentation is a class I recommendation by current ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) guidelines. Earlier achievement of therapeutic antiplatelet effects by aspirin loading has long been considered the standard of care. However, the effects of the loading dose of aspirin (alone or in addition to a chronic maintenance oral dose) have not been studied. A large proportion of myocardial cell death occurs upon and after reperfusion (reperfusion injury). Numerous agents and interventions have been shown to limit infarct size in animal models when administered before or immediately after reperfusion. However, these interventions have predominantly failed to show significant protection in clinical studies. In the current review, we raise the hypothesis that aspirin loading may be the culprit. Data obtained from animal models consistently show that statins, ticagrelor, opiates, and ischemic postconditioning limit myocardial infarct size. In most of these studies, aspirin was not administered. However, when aspirin was administered before reperfusion (as is the case in the majority of studies enrolling STEMI patients), the protective effects of statin, ticagrelor, morphine, and ischemic postconditioning were attenuated, which can be plausibly attributable to aspirin loading. We therefore suggest studying the effects of aspirin loading before reperfusion on the infarct size limiting effects of statins, ticagrelor, morphine, and/ or postconditioning in large animal models using long reperfusion periods (at least 24 h). If indeed aspirin attenuates the protective effects, clinical trials should be conducted comparing aspirin loading to alternative antiplatelet regimens without aspirin loading in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.
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.