Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40182153›Full record

ReviewJournal of molecular and cellular cardiology plus2025

Cardioprotective strategies in myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury: Implications for improving clinical translation.

Chao Tong, Bingying Zhou

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of molecular and cellular cardiology plus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Association ofPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Chao TongState Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100037, China.
Bingying ZhouState Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100037, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ischemic heart disease is the most common cause of death and disability globally which is caused by reduced or complete cessation of blood flow to a portion of the myocardium. One of its clinical manifestations is myocardial infarction, which is commonly treated by restoring of blood flow through reperfusion therapies. However, serious ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) can occur, significantly undermining clinical outcomes, for which there is currently no effective therapy. This review revisits several potential pharmacological IRI intervention strategies that have entered preclinical or clinical research phases. Here, we discuss what we have learned through translational failures over the years, and propose possible ways to enhance translation efficiency.

Indexed as

Clinical translationIschemia-reperfusion injuryPharmacological interventions

Identifiers

PMID40182153
PMCPMC11967023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.