ArticleJACC. Advances2025
Routinely Available Inflammatory Biomarkers Are Not Associated With Target Lesion Revascularization After Coronary Intervention.
Article in JACC. Advances, 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.
- Complement Components C1r and C8 Serve as Potential Inflammatory Biomarkers for Coronary Heart Disease Severity: The Mediating Role of C-Reactive Protein.Journal of inflammation research · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiomarkers of inflammation are reliable predictors of adverse cardiovascular events in coronary artery disease. However, the association between systemic inflammation and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-related adverse events remains widely unclear.
objectivesThe objective of this study was to investigate the association of routinely assessed inflammatory biomarkers C-reactive protein, leukocytes, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) with patient outcomes in an unselected patient cohort undergoing PCI.
methodsA total of 7,412 patients (median age 64 years, 73.2% male) were enrolled in this single-center observational trial with a median follow-up time of 4.6 years. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) and acute stent thrombosis (ST) were defined as primary endpoints. Further endpoints included mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (composite of cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke). Cox proportional hazard regression was used for statistical analysis with a level of significance set at P < 0.01.
resultsIn the total study cohort, patients experiencing subsequent TLR (n = 488, 6.6%) had more comorbidities and underwent more complex primary interventions. Interestingly, no relation was found between systemic inflammation and subsequent TLR (eg, adjusted HR for C-reactive protein: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.85-1.03], P = 0.150), 30-day TLR (0.89 [95% CI: 0.75-1.05], P = 0.177), or acute ST (1.06 [95% CI: 0.79-1.42], P = 0.708) in multivariable analysis, neither in elective nor in acute interventions. All investigated inflammatory biomarkers were, however, significantly associated with all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and 3-point MACE, even after comprehensive adjustment for clinical and interventional parameters.
conclusionsWhile our results emphasize the importance of systemic inflammatory activation for mortality and MACE, elevated baseline inflammatory parameters show no correlation with TLR or acute ST and, therefore, should not delay PCI in the era of second-generation drug-eluting stents.
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.