↓ Skip to main content

Is the concomitant use of clopidogrel and Proton Pump Inhibitors still associated with increased adverse cardiovascular outcomes following coronary angioplasty?: a systematic review and meta-analysis…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Is the concomitant use of clopidogrel and Proton Pump Inhibitors still associated with increased adverse cardiovascular outcomes following coronary angioplasty?: a systematic review and meta-analysis of recently published studies (2012 – 2016)
Published in
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12872-016-0453-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pravesh Kumar Bundhun, Abhishek Rishikesh Teeluck, Akash Bhurtu, Wei-Qiang Huang

Abstract

Controversies were previously observed with the concomitant use of clopidogrel and Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs), especially omeprazole, following coronary angioplasty. Even though several studies showed no interaction between clopidogrel and PPIs, questions have been raised about the decrease in antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel with PPIs. A previously published meta-analysis showed concomitant use of clopidogrel and PPIs to be associated with higher adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, data which were used were extracted from studies published before the year 2012. Whether these controversies still exist in this new era is not clear. Therefore, we aim to show if the concomitant use of clopidogrel and PPIs is still associated with higher adverse outcomes following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) using data obtained from recently published studies (2012 to 2016). Electronic databases were searched for recent publications (2012-2016) comparing (clopidogrel plus PPIs) versus clopidogrel alone following PCI. Adverse cardiovascular outcomes were considered as the clinical endpoints. Odds Ratios (OR) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were used as the statistical parameters and the pooled analyses were performed with RevMan 5.3 software. Eleven studies with a total number of 84,729 patients (29,235 patients from the PPIs group versus 55,494 patients from the non-PPIs group) were included. Results of this analysis showed that short term mortality and Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR) significantly favored the non-PPIs group with OR: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.43-1.68, P < 0.00001 and OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.06-1.49, P = 0.009 respectively. Long-term Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACEs), Myocardial Infarction (MI), Stent Thrombosis (ST) and TVR significantly favored patients who did not use PPIs with OR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.23-1.53, P < 0.00001, OR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.26-1.57, P < 0.00001 and OR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.13-1.70, P = 0.002 and OR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.01-1.61, P = 0.04 respectively. However, the result for long term mortality was not statistically significant. The combined use of clopidogrel with PPIs is still associated with significantly higher adverse cardiovascular events such as MACEs, ST and MI following PCI supporting results of the previously published meta-analysis. However, long-term mortality is not statistically significant warranting further analysis with randomized patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 12%
Other 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Researcher 6 7%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 32 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 28%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 20 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Chemistry 2 2%
Unspecified 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 33 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 January 2020.
All research outputs
#2,086,171
of 23,628,742 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#70
of 1,723 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,381
of 424,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#5
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,628,742 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,723 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,172 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.