ArticleCardiovascular toxicology2025
Cardiovascular Risk with Prokinetics: A Self-Controlled Case Series Study Using a Korean Nationwide Health Claims Database.
Article in Cardiovascular toxicology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There have been concerns about potential adverse cardiovascular (CV) events associated with prokinetics that enhance gastrointestinal (GI) motility. To evaluate whether prokinetics use was associated with increased CV risk. We conducted a self-controlled case series (SCCS) study using the National Health Claims Database in South Korea. Age-adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRR) for the development of CV events (composite of myocardial infarction and stroke) were estimated by comparing the incidence during the risk period with prokinetics and the control period without prokinetics. This SCCS study included 15,621 participants who experienced CV events and exposure to prokinetics between 2004 and 2019. The risk period with prokinetics had a significantly increased risk for CV events compared to the control period (IRR 1.56, 95% CI 1.48-1.66). When the risk period was categorized according to the time from initiation of prokinetics, CV risk was highest in the first 7 days (IRR 2.29, 95% CI 2.13-2.47), and declined to non-significance in ≥ 15 days (IRR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94-1.13). In the analysis according to the class of prokinetics, CV risk was highest in the order of central dopamine type 2 (D2) receptor antagonist (IRR 2.14, 95% CI 1.95-2.34), peripheral D2 receptor antagonist (IRR 1.37, 95% CI 1.24-1.51), and selective 5-hydroxytryptamine 4 receptor agonist (IRR 1.29, 95% CI 1.17-1.42). The use of prokinetics was associated with an increased risk of CV adverse events, particularly in the early period following initiation of central D2 receptor antagonists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40684411What 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.