ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2023
The clinical safety of generic and brand clopidogrel in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- UV-cure hydrogels for cardiac regeneration: a comprehensive review.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Review
- Cardiac tissue engineering: an emerging approach to the treatment of heart failure.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although some recent studies have found that original and generic clopidogrel brands are acceptable and have the same pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, there is insufficient evidence to compare the clinical effectiveness and safety of brand and generic clopidogrel. The current study aims to evaluate the clinical safety of brand and generic clopidogrel by comparing clinical outcomes in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Method: This was a single centre, parallel-arm, phase III, open-label, and randomized group sequential trial. It was conducted to compare the clinical safety of a brand and three generic clopidogrel forms in patients who have undergone CEA. All enrolled subjects were treated perioperatively with dual antiplatelet (aspirin and clopidogrel). The involved participants were assigned randomly into four groups based on the type of clopidogrel. Safety parameters were measured, including haematoma, blood draining from drainage, mouth deviation, tongue deviation, and stroke. SPSS software was used to perform the data analysis. Results: The trial included 80 patients in total (20 patients per group). Thirty-one (38.8%) patients were male. The mean age of patients was 65.6 years (49-79). Eighteen (22.5%) patients had a history of previous coronary intervention, and seventeen (21.3%) had symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Overall, Plavix or Piax combined with aspirin were linked to better clinical safety than the other two generic clopidogrel, as the amount of bleeding was nearly two times lower in patients treated with Plavix or Piax (270±92.39 and 271.5±80.60, respectively) compared to PlavigrelAwa or Plavineer (505.7±169.1 and 496.5±174.6, respectively) ( Conclusion: The findings of the current study showed diversity in clinical safety of different clopidogrel formulations that were provided perioperatively in CEA 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.