Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16255780›Full record

ArticleCurrent controlled trials in cardiovascular medicine2005

Compliance of a cobalt chromium coronary stent alloy--the COVIS trial.

Jens Hagemeister, Frank M Baer, Robert H G Schwinger, Hans W Höpp

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current controlled trials in cardiovascular medicine, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Recent advances in drug eluting stents.International journal of pharmaceutics · 2013
    Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jens HagemeisterDepartment of Medicine III, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str, 62, 50924 Cologne, Germany. jens.hagemeister@uk-koeln.de
Frank M Baer
Robert H G Schwinger
Hans W Höpp
University of Cologne · DEUniversity Hospital Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCobalt chromium coronary stents are increasingly being used in percutaneous coronary interventions. There are, however, no reliable data about the characteristics of unfolding and visibility of this stent alloy in vivo. The aim of this study is to compare cobalt chromium coronary stents with conventional stainless steel stents using intracoronary ultrasound.

methodsTwenty de novo native coronary stenoses < or = 20 mm in length (target vessel reference diameter > or = 2.5 and < or = 4.0 mm) received under sequential intracoronary ultrasound either a cobalt chromium stent (Multi-Link Vision; n = 10) or a stainless steel stent (Multi-Link Zeta; n = 10).

resultsFor optimal unfolding, the cobalt chromium stent requires a higher balloon deployment pressure (13.90 +/- 2.03 atm) than the stainless steel stent (11.50 +/- 2.12 atm). Furthermore, the achieved target vessel diameter of the cobalt chromium stent (Visibility-Index QCA/IVUS Multi-Link Vision 1.13 / Multi-Link Zeta 1.04) is more easily overrated by Quantitative Coronary Analysis.

conclusionThese data indicate that stent material-specific recommendations for optimal implantation pressure and different stent material with an equal design should both be considered in interpreting QCA-analysis.

Identifiers

PMID16255780
PMCPMC1283148
OpenAlexW2121640661

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.