SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2022
Efficacy and safety of a bridging strategy that uses intravenous platelet glycoprotein receptor inhibitors for patients undergoing surgery after coronary stent implantation: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacovigilance analysis of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors: A FAERS-based signal detection study.Medicine · 2026Article
- 2024 EACTS/EACTAIC Guidelines on patient blood management in adult cardiac surgery in collaboration with EBCP.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2025Article
- 2024 EACTS/EACTAIC Guidelines on patient blood management in adult cardiac surgery in collaboration with EBCP.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Current concepts and novel targets for antiplatelet therapy.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2023Review
- Eptifibatide, an Older Therapeutic Peptide with New Indications: From Clinical Pharmacology to Everyday Clinical Practice.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent guidelines indicate we can consider a bridging strategy that uses intravenous, reversible glycoprotein inhibitors for patients that required surgery following recent stent implantation. However, no strong clinical evidence exists that demonstrates the efficacy and safety of this treatment. Therefore, in this study, the efficacy and safety of a bridging strategy that uses intravenous platelet glycoprotein receptor inhibitors will be evaluated.
methodsA meta-analysis was performed on preoperative bridging studies in patients undergoing coronary stent surgery. The primary outcome was the success rate of no major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). The secondary outcomes were the success rate of no reoperations to stop bleeding.
resultsA total of 10 studies that included 382 patients were used in this meta-analysis. For the primary endpoint, the success rate was 97.7% (95% CI 94.4-98.0%) for glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, 98.8% (95% CI 96.0-100%) for tirofiban (6 studies) and 95.8% (95% CI 90.4-99.4%) for eptifibatide (4 studies). For secondary endpoints, the success rate was 98.0% (95% CI 94.8-99.9%) for glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, 99.7% (95% CI 97.1-100%) for tirofiban (5 studies), and 95.3% (95% CI 88.5-99.4%) for eptifibatide (4 studies).
conclusionThe results of this study showed that the use of intravenous platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors as a bridging strategy might be safe and effective for patients undergoing coronary stent implantation that require surgery soon after.
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.