MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139163501 · doi:10.1097/fjc.0000000000000976

Revisiting the Evidence for Dipyridamole in Reducing Restenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W3139163501 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor Simard, Pouya Motazedian, Shan Dhaliwal, Pietro Di Santo, Richard G. Jung, F. Daniel Ramirez, Alisha Labinaz, Spencer Short, Simon Parlow, Joanne Joseph, Adil Rasheed, Mark Rockley, Jeffrey A. Marbach, Marie‐Cécile Domecq, Juan Russo, Aun‐Yeong Chong, Rob Beanlands, Benjamin Hibbert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDipyridamoleMedicineRestenosisRevascularizationInternal medicineOcclusionConfidence intervalCardiologySurgeryStentMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Atherosclerosis remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality, with revascularization remaining a cornerstone of management. Conventional revascularization modalities remain challenged by target vessel reocclusion-an event driven by mechanical, thrombotic, and proliferative processes. Despite considerable advancements, restenosis remains the focus of ongoing research. Adjunctive agents, including dipyridamole, offer a multitude of effects that may improve vascular homeostasis. We sought to quantify the potential therapeutic impact of dipyridamole on vascular occlusion. We performed a literature search (EMBASE and MEDLINE) examining studies that encompassed 3 areas: (1) one of the designated medical therapies applied in (2) the setting of a vascular intervention with (3) an outcome including vascular occlusion rates and/or quantification of neointimal proliferation/restenosis. The primary outcome was vascular occlusion rates. The secondary outcome was the degree of restenosis by neointimal quantification. Both human and animal studies were included in this translational analysis. There were 6,839 articles screened, from which 73 studies were included, encompassing 16,146 vessels followed up for a mean of 327.3 days (range 7-3650 days). Preclinical studies demonstrate that dipyridamole results in reduced vascular occlusion rates {24.9% vs. 48.8%, risk ratio 0.53 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40-0.70], I2 = 39%, P < 0.00001}, owing to diminished neointimal proliferation [standardized mean differences -1.13 (95% CI -1.74 to -0.53), I2 = 91%, P = 0.0002]. Clinical studies similarly demonstrated reduced occlusion rates with dipyridamole therapy [23.5% vs. 31.0%, risk ratio 0.77 (95% CI 0.67-0.88), I2 = 84%, P < 0.0001]. Dipyridamole may improve post-intervention vascular patency and mitigate restenosis. Dedicated studies are warranted to delineate its role as an adjunctive agent after revascularization.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.029
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.210
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiovascular PharmacologySame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207