Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 641

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of Glucose-Insulin-Potassium Infusion on Mortality in Patients With Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: The CREATE-ECLA Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
The CREATE-ECLA Trial Group Investigators*·2005·JAMA
DOI 10.1001/jama.293.4.437
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

CONTEXT: Glucose-insulin-potassium (GIK) infusion is a widely applicable, low-cost therapy that has been postulated to improve mortality in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Given the potential global importance of GIK infusion, a large, adequately powered randomized trial is required to determine the effect of GIK on mortality in patients with STEMI. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of high-dose GIK infusion on mortality in patients with STEMI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized controlled trial conducted in 470 centers worldwide among 20,201 patients with STEMI who presented within 12 hours of symptom onset. The mean age of patients was 58.6 years, and evidence-based therapies were commonly used. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to receive GIK intravenous infusion for 24 hours plus usual care (n = 10,091) or to receive usual care alone (controls; n = 10,110). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality, cardiac arrest, cardiogenic shock, and reinfarction at 30 days after randomization. RESULTS: At 30 days, 976 control patients (9.7%) and 1004 GIK infusion patients (10.0%) died (hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95-1.13; P = .45). There were no significant differences in the rates of cardiac arrest (1.5% [151/10 107] in control and 1.4% [139/10,088] in GIK infusion; HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74-1.17; P = .51), cardiogenic shock (6.3% [640/10 107] vs 6.6% [667/10 088]; HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.94-1.17; P = .38), or reinfarction (2.4% [246/10,107] vs 2.3% [236/10,088]; HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.82-1.17; P = .81). The rates of heart failure at 7 days after randomization were also similar between the groups (16.9% [1711/10,107] vs 17.1% [1721/10,088]; HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.95-1.08; P = .72). The lack of benefit of GIK infusion on mortality was consistent in prespecified subgroups, including in those with and without diabetes, in those presenting with and without heart failure, in those presenting early and later after symptom onset, and in those receiving and not receiving reperfusion therapy (thrombolysis or primary percutaneous coronary intervention). CONCLUSION: In this large, international randomized trial, high-dose GIK infusion had a neutral effect on mortality, cardiac arrest, and cardiogenic shock in patients with acute STEMI.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.293.4.437

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
The CREATE-ECLA Trial Group Investigators*
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2005-01-26
Volume
293
Issue
4
Pages
437
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
DOI
10.1001/jama.293.4.437
OpenAlex
W2047760971
Cited by
641
References
3
FWCI
54.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.