ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023
Guided vs. conventional anti-platelet therapy for patients with acute coronary syndrome: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimizing P2Y12 Inhibitor Therapy in Post-PCI Patients Through Genotype-Guided Strategies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2026Pooled it
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
Background: Whether guided antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is effective in improving net clinical benefits compared with conventional antiplatelet therapy remains controversial. Therefore, we assessed the safety and efficacy of guided antiplatelet therapy in patients with ACS and undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Method: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to select the relevant randomized controlled trials comparing the guided and conventional antiplatelet therapy in patients with ACS. The primary and safety outcomes are major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major bleeding, respectively. The efficacy outcomes included myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, all-cause death, and cardiovascular death. We selected the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as effect size and calculated it using the Review Manager software. In addition, we evaluated the final results by trial sequential analysis (registered by PROSPERO, CRD 42020210912). Results: We selected seven randomized controlled trials and included 8,451 patients in this meta-analysis. Guided antiplatelet therapy can significantly reduce the risk of MACE (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.54-0.76, Conclusions: The guided antiplatelet therapy is not only associated with a comparable risk of bleeding but also with a lower risk of MACE, myocardial infarction, all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and stent thrombosis than the conventional strategy in patients with ACS.
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.