ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Sustainability of C-Reactive Protein Apheresis in Acute Myocardial Infarction-Results from a Supplementary Data Analysis of the Exploratory C-Reactive Protein in Acute Myocardial Infarction-1 Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- C-reactive protein in cardiovascular disease: clinical associations, conformation-dependent biology, and therapeutic perspectives.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Mechanisms and Therapeutic Potential of Multiple Forms of Cell Death in Myocardial Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Being Eaten Alive: How Energy-Deprived Cells Are Disposed of, Mediated by C-Reactive Protein-Including a Treatment Option.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- C-reactive protein: a target for therapy to reduce inflammation.Frontiers in immunology · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In the multicenter, non-randomized, exploratory C-reactive protein (CRP) Apheresis in Myocardial Infarction (CAMI-1) study, CRP apheresis after ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) significantly decreased blood CRP concentrations in humans. Cardiac damage was assessed by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR1) 3−9 d after onset of STEMI symptoms and quantified by myocardial infarct size (IS; %), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF; %), circumferential strain (CS) and longitudinal strain (LS). Compared with the control group (n = 34), cardiac damage was significantly lower in the apheresis group (n = 32). These findings suggested improved wound healing due to CRP apheresis already within few days after the STEMI event. In the current supplementary data analysis of CAMI-1, we have tested by a follow-up CMR (CMR2) after an average of 88 (65−177) d whether the effect of CRP apheresis is clinically maintained. After this time period, wound healing in STEMI is considered complete. Whereas patients with low CRP production and a CRP gradient cut off of <0.6 mg/L/h in the hours after STEMI (9 of 32 patients in the CRP apheresis group) did not significantly benefit from CRP apheresis in CMR2, patients with high CRP production and a CRP gradient cut off of >0.6 mg/L/h (23 of 32 patients in the CRP apheresis group) showed significant treatment benefit. In the latter patients, CMR2 revealed a lower IS (−5.4%; p = 0.05), a better LVEF (+6.4%; p = 0.03), and an improved CS (−6.1%; p = 0.005). No significant improvement, however, was observed for LS (−2.9%; p = 0.1). These data suggest a sustained positive effect of CRP apheresis on heart physiology in STEMI patients with high CRP production well beyond the period of its application. The data demonstrate the sustainability of the CRP removal from plasma which is associated with less scar tissue.
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.