SynthesisPloS one2022
Intracoronary pharmacological therapy versus aspiration thrombectomy in STEMI (IPAT-STEMI): A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identification and Management Strategies for Intracoronary High Thrombus Burden in Patients With STEMI: A Practical Experience and Literature Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- TIMI frame count as a predictor of major adverse cardiovascular events during the first month after primary PCI.Caspian journal of internal medicine · 2024Article
- COVID-19 as an independent predictor of aspiration thrombectomy in STEMI. National data from the ORPKI register in the years 2020-2022.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThrombus load in STEMI patients remains a challenge in practice. It aggravates coronary obstruction leading to impaired myocardial perfusion, worsened cardiac function, and adverse clinical outcomes. Various strategies have been advocated to reduce thrombus burden.
objectivesThis meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of intracoronary-administered thrombolytics or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) in comparison with aspiration thrombectomy (AT) as an adjunct to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).
methodsA comprehensive literature search for randomized trials that compared intracoronary-administered thrombolytics or GPI with AT in STEMI patients who underwent PCI, was conducted using various databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRALE). Primary outcome was procedural measures (e.g., TIMI flow grade 3, TIMI myocardial perfusion grade (TMPG) 3, Myocardial blush grade (MBG) 2/3, ST-segment resolution (STR)).
resultsTwelve randomized trials enrolled 1,466 patients: 696 were randomized to intracoronary-administered pharmacological interventions and 553 to AT. Patients randomized to PCI alone were excluded. Thrombolytics significantly improved TIMI flow grade 3 (odds ratio = 3.71, 95% CI: 1.85-7.45), complete STR (odds ratio = 3.64, 95% CI: 1.60-8.26), and TMPG 3 (odds ratio = 5.31, 95% CI: 2.48-11.36). Thrombolytics significantly reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (odds ratio = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.13-0.65) without increasing bleeding risk. Trial sequential analysis assessment confirmed the superiority of thrombolytics for the primary outcome. Intracoronary GPI, either alone or combined with AT, did not improve procedural or clinical outcomes.
conclusionsCompared with AT, intracoronary-administered thrombolytics significantly improved myocardial perfusion and MACE in STEMI patients.
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.