ArticleCardiology research and practice2026
The Association of Peak Glycemia and No-Reflow Phenomenon in Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.
Article in Cardiology research and practice, 2026. 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.
- The Association of Peak Glycemia and No-Reflow Phenomenon in Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.Cardiology research and practice · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study investigates the effect of peak glycemia on the no-reflow phenomenon in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) to examine the relationship between elevated blood glucose (BG) levels and no-reflow. Method: A total of 252 STEMI patients (81.7% male) who underwent PPCI were enrolled. BG was measured by a glucometer every 6 h for 24 h, starting at the time of patient admission. The maximum measured BG was considered the peak glycemic level. A corrected TIMI frame count (CTFC) of less than 27 was used to define the no-reflow phenomenon in this study. Results: 42.4% of participants experienced no flow, with a significant association between this condition and diabetes mellitus, peak glycemia, smoking history, and elevated LDL cholesterol levels. Specifically, peak glycemia levels above 180 mg/dL independently increased the odds of no-reflow occurrence (OR = 8.16, 95% CI = 4.1-16.2, Conclusion: The importance of monitoring BG levels in STEMI patients, as well as the critical role of a multidisciplinary approach, regardless of diabetic status, in mitigating the risk of no-reflow and improving clinical outcomes, should be highlighted.
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.