Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10762439›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of experimental pathology2000

The mechanisms of coronary restenosis: insights from experimental models.

G A Ferns, T Y Avades

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of experimental pathology, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Experimental Liver Cirrhosis Inhibits Restenosis after Balloon Angioplasty.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

G A FernsCentre for Clinical Science and Measurement, School of Biological Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford; The Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK. g.ferns@surrey.ac.uk
T Y Avades

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since its introduction into clinical practice, more than 20 years ago, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) has proven to be an effective, minimally invasive alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). During this time there have been great improvements in the design of balloon catheters, operative procedures and adjuvant drug therapy, and this has resulted in low rates of primary failure and short-term complications. However, the potential benefits of angioplasty are diminished by the high rate of recurrent disease. Up to 40% of patients undergoing angioplasty develop clinically significant restenosis within a year of the procedure. Although the deployment of endovascular stents at the time of angioplasty improves the short-term outcome, 'in-stent' stenosis remains an enduring problem. In order to gain an insight into the mechanisms of restenosis, several experimental models of angioplasty have been developed. These have been used together with the tools provided by recent advances in molecular biology and catheter design to investigate restenosis in detail. It is now possible to deliver highly specific molecular antagonists, such as antisense gene sequences, to the site of injury. The knowledge provided by these studies may ultimately lead to novel forms of intervention. The present review is a synopsis of our current understanding of the pathological mechanisms of restenosis.

Indexed as

Angioplasty, Balloon, CoronaryDisease Models, AnimalAnimalsCoronary DiseaseGrowth SubstancesHumansMuscle, Smooth, VascularRabbitsRatsRecurrenceSwineGrowth Substances

Identifiers

PMID10762439
PMCPMC2517722

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.