SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Reperfusion Strategy of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-Analysis of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Pharmaco-Invasive Therapy.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- A contemporary overview of emergency myocardial infarction hospitalizations with primary percutaneous coronary intervention in Brazil: regional trends of costs and outcomes.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- Article
- Prolonged pain-to-balloon time still impairs midterm left ventricular function following STEMI.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- Review
- Efficacy and Safety of a Pharmaco-Invasive Strategy Using Half-Dose Recombinant Human Prourokinase in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction During Hospitalization.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pharmaco-invasive therapy (PIT), combining thrombolysis and percutaneous coronary intervention, was a potential complement for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), while bleeding risk was still a concern. Objectives: This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety outcomes of PIT and pPCI. Methods: A systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were conducted on Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Scopus. RCTs and observational studies were all collected and respectively analyzed, and combined pooled analysis was also presented. The primary efficacy outcome was short-term all-cause mortality within 30 days, including in-hospital period. The primary safety outcome was 30-day trial-defined major bleeding events. Results: A total of 26,597 patients from 5 RCTs and 12 observational studies were included. There was no significant difference in short-term mortality [RCTs: risk ratio ( Conclusion: Pharmaco-invasive therapy could be an important complement for pPCI in real-world clinical practice under specific conditions, but studies aiming at optimizing thrombolysis and its combination of mandatory coronary angiography are also warranted.
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.