SynthesisAnnals of medicine2025
Efficacy and safety of empagliflozin for the acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Annals of medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of different prehabilitation programs on the major abdominal surgery population: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors combined with conventional therapy in myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Different beta-blockers for preventing arrhythmic events in patients with long QT syndrome: a network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of empagliflozin in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) treatment by synthesizing evidence from published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
methodsPubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases were thoroughly retrieved from inception to November 30, 2024, to identify eligible RCTs comparing empagliflozin with placebo in AMI treatment. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was leveraged to detect potential bias. The robustness of the results was examined
resultsData from 9 RCTs involving 7,237 AMI patients were analyzed. Meta-analysis revealed that empagliflozin significantly reduced the total hospitalization rate for heart failure (HF) in AMI patients in comparison to placebo (relative risk [RR] = 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.57-0.85). Additionally, empagliflozin significantly improved their ejection fraction (EF) (standard mean difference [SMD] = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.63-1.38), left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS) (SMD = -0.27, 95% CI = -0.48 to -0.06), body weight (SMD = -0.80, 95% CI = -1.15 to -0.45), and systolic blood pressure (SBP) (SMD = -0.54, 95% CI = -0.88 to -0.20). Statistically significant differences were not noted in other parameters (all
conclusionEmpagliflozin lowers the total hospitalization rate for HF in AMI patients and significantly improves EF, LVGLS, body weight, and SBP without raising the likelihood of AEs.
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.