ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2025
Efficacy of sacubitril-valsartan combined with rosuvastatin calcium in the treatment of unstable angina pectoris and its effects on blood lipids and hemorheology.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the clinical efficacy of sacubitril-valsartan (SV) combined with rosuvastatin calcium (RC) in the treatment of patients with unstable angina pectoris (UAP). Methods: This was retrospective study. Eighty patients with UAP admitted to The First Affiliated Hospital of Yangtze University from December 2022 to December 2023 were included and divided into observation group (n=40) and control group (n=40) according to treatment regimens. Patients in the control group received RC, while the observation group received SV combined with RC. Clinical efficacy, adverse reactions, and blood lipid, hemorheology, and cardiac function before and six months after treatment were compared between the two groups. Results: The total efficacy of the observation group was higher than the control group (P<0.05). After six months of treatment, the levels of TG, TC, and LDL-C decreased in both groups, with the observation group showing more significant decrease, while the HDL-C level increased, with the observation group showing more significant increase (P<0.05); The hemorheological indicators of both groups decreased compared to before treatment, and the degree of decrease was more significant in the observation group (P<0.05); Both groups showed significant improvement in cardiac function levels compared to before treatment, with the observation group showing more pronounced improvement (P<0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in both were not statistically significant different (P=0.712). Conclusion: The use of SV combined with RC in treatment of UPA has significant clinical effects, improving patients' blood lipids, hemorheology, and cardiac function indicators without increasing adverse reactions.
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.