ArticlePloS one2022
Omecamtiv mecarbil treatment improves post-resuscitation cardiac function and neurological outcome in a rat model.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeting cardiac myosin in HFrEF: mechanism, clinical evidence, and the role of omecamtiv mecarbil.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Review
- Translational approach to assess brain injury after cardiac arrest in preclinical models: a narrative review.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMyocardial dysfunction is a major cause of poor outcomes in the post-cardiac arrest period. Omecamtiv mecarbil (OM) is a selective small molecule activator of cardiac myosin that prolongs myocardial systole and increases stroke volume without apparent effects on myocardial oxygen demand. OM administration is safe and improves cardiac function in patients with acute heart failure. Whether OM improves post-resuscitation myocardial dysfunction remains unclear. This study investigated the effect of OM treatment on post-resuscitation myocardial dysfunction and outcomes. METHODS AND
resultsAdult male rats were resuscitated after 9.5 min of asphyxia-induced cardiac arrest. OM and normal saline was continuously intravenously infused after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) at 0.25 mg/kg/h for 4 h in the experimental group and control group, respectively (n = 20 in each group). Hemodynamic parameters were measured hourly and monitored for 4 h after cardiac arrest. Recovery of neurological function was evaluated by neurological functioning scores (0-12; favorable: 11-12) for rats 72 h after cardiac arrest. OM treatment prolonged left ventricular ejection time and improved post-resuscitation cardiac output. Post-resuscitation heart rate and left ventricular systolic function (dp/dt40) were not different between groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed non-statistically higher 72-h survival in the OM group (72.2% [13/18] and 58.8% [10/17], p = 0.386). The OM group had a higher chance of having favorable neurological outcomes in surviving rats 72 h after cardiac arrest (84.6% [11/13] vs. 40% [4/10], p = 0.026). The percentage of damaged neurons was lower in the OM group in a histology study at 72 h after cardiac arrest (55.5±2.3% vs. 76.2±10.2%, p = 0.004).
conclusionsOM treatment improved post-resuscitation myocardial dysfunction and neurological outcome in an animal model. These findings support further pre-clinical studies to improve outcomes in post-cardiac arrest care.
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.