ArticleJournal of inflammation research2024
Predictive Value of Pan-Immune Inflammation Value and Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index for Identifying Coronary Vulnerable Plaques: New Insights from Optical Coherence Tomography in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients.
Article in Journal of inflammation research, 2024. 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.
- Diagnostic efficacy of pan-immune inflammation value for ulcerative colitis activity: a study based on multi-indicator comparison and diagnostic grey zone validation.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Comparative value of metabolic and inflammatory indices for identifying OCT-derived coronary plaque vulnerability in patients with acute coronary syndrome and type 2 diabetes mellitus.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- The systemic immune-inflammation index in coronary heart disease: a narrative review of thromboinflammation, phenotype-dependent utility, and clinical translation.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Predictive utility of systemic inflammatory response index and pan-immune-inflammatory value in assessing myocardial infarction risk among cases with unstable angina.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The predictive value of PIV and SII in identifying vulnerable plaques among ACS patients remains poorly understood. This study represents the inaugural use of OCT to identify vulnerable plaques and establishes a predictive model incorporating PIV and SII, enhancing clinical treatment strategies. Methods: A total of 523 eligible ACS patients underwent coronary angiography and OCT. Clinical data were collected and analyzed. Multifactorial logistic regression was employed to identify factors influencing TCFA. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the PIV and SII for TCFA, with a calculation of the area under the ROC curve (AUC). The optimal cutoff values for PVI and SII were calculated. Results: Compared to the non-TCFA group, the TCFA group exhibited significantly higher levels of hypersensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), PIV, and SII (all P <0.05). Multifactorial logistic regression analysis revealed that PIV (odds ratio [OR], 1.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35-2.06; P <0.001) and SII (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.14-2.08; P <0.001) were independent risk factors for TCFA development. The optimal cutoff value for PIV was 490.7, achieving a diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of 75.44% and 89.32%, respectively. For SII, the optimal cutoff value was 802.9, with a diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of 67.54% and 79.61%, respectively. Conclusion: This study suggests that PIV and SII can serve as noninvasive, practical, and cost-effective biomarkers for evaluating plaque vulnerability 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.