ArticleReviews in cardiovascular medicine2025
Evaluation of the Atherogenic Index of Plasma in the Prognostic Value of Ischemic Heart Failure Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.
Article in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prognostic value of the atherogenic index of plasma combined with lactate-to-albumin ratio for in-hospital mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The atherogenic index of plasma (AIP) is calculated as the logarithm of the triglyceride (TG) to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) ratio. While previous studies suggested that TG and HDL-C levels were linked to the prognosis in various cardiovascular conditions, including ischemic heart failure (IHF), there is limited research specifically examining AIP in the context of IHF. Therefore, our study sought to explore the association between AIP and the prognosis of IHF and to compare the predictive value of AIP, HDL-C, and TG levels for identifying patients with poor outcomes. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single institution involving 2036 IHF patients with post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) who were followed for 36 months. Patients were divided into four groups categorized according to AIP quartiles. The primary outcome of interest was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), while secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and any revascularization. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to evaluate the occurrence of endpoints across the four groups. Multivariate Cox regression analysis reinforced that AIP independently predicted primary and secondary outcomes. Restricted cubic spline (RCS) method was employed to examine the non-linear association between AIP and endpoints. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, combined with the Delong test, were used to assess and compare the predictive accuracy of AIP, TG, and HDL-C. Result: The incidence of MACEs (Q4:Q1 = 50.6:23.0, Conclusion: In IHF patients after PCI, AIP was strongly relevant to an increased risk of MACEs and had the best predictive validity compared with TG and HDL-C.
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.