Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,021

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical Implications of the ‘No Reflow’ Phenomenon: A Predictor of Complications and Left Ventricular Remodeling in Reperfused Anterior Wall Myocardial Infarction

Ito, Hiroshi, Maruyama, Atsushi, Iwakura, Katsuomi, Takiuchi, Shin, Masuyama, Tohru, Hori, Masatsugu, Higashino, Yorihiko, Fujii, Kenshi, Minamino, Takazo·1996·Circulation

Abstract

Background Recent studies demonstrated that the “no reflow” phenomenon after coronary reflow implies the presence of advanced myocardial damage. In this study, we verified the prognostic value of the detection of this phenomenon by studying complications, left ventricular morphology, and in-hospital survival after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods and Results The study population consisted of 126 patients with a first anterior AMI. All patients received coronary reflow within 24 hours of onset of symptoms and underwent myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) before and shortly after coronary reflow with an intracoronary injection of sonicated microbubbles. From contrast reperfusion patterns, patients were divided into two subsets: those with MCE no reflow (47 patients, 37%) and those with MCE reflow (79 patients). There was no difference in the frequency of arrhythmia or coronary events between the two subsets. Pericardial effusion and early congestive heart failure were observed more frequently in patients with MCE no reflow than in those with MCE reflow (26% versus 4%, P <.05; 45% versus 15%, P <.05, respectively). Congestive heart failure tended to be prolonged in those with MCE no reflow, and 3 patients (7%) of this subset died of pump failure. Left ventricular end-diastolic volume progressively increased in the convalescent stage in patients with MCE no reflow (early versus late, 145±43 versus 169±60 mL, P <.001), whereas it decreased in those with MCE reflow (154±42 versus 144±44 mL, P <.01). Conclusions The substantial size of the MCE no reflow phenomenon at coronary reflow conveys useful information about an outcome of coronary intervention and left ventricular remodeling in individual patients with anterior wall AMI, although these are suggestive results in a limited number of patients.

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 · 10.1161/01.cir.93.2.223

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 1,021

Metadata

Authors
Ito, H., Maruyama, A., Iwakura, K., Takiuchi, S., Masuyama, T., Hori, M., Higashino, Y., Fujii, K., & Minamino, T.
Venue
Circulation
Published
1996-01-15
Volume
93
Issue
2
Pages
223-228
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2051732586
Cited by
1,021
References
1
FWCI
20.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical Implications of the ‘No Reflow’ Phenomenon: A Predictor of Complications and Left Ventricular Remodeling in Reperfused Anterior Wall Myocardial Infarction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.93.2.223
The paper
Ito, H., Maruyama, A., Iwakura, K., Takiuchi, S., Masuyama, T., Hori, M., Higashino, Y., Fujii, K., & Minamino, T. (1996). Clinical Implications of the ‘No Reflow’ Phenomenon: A Predictor of Complications and Left Ventricular Remodeling in Reperfused Anterior Wall Myocardial Infarction. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.93.2.223

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.