Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21327913›Full record

ReviewThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2011

Dedicated bifurcation analysis: basic principles.

Joan C Tuinenburg, Gerhard Koning, Andrei Rareş, Johannes P Janssen, Alexandra J Lansky, Johan H C Reiber

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Cardiovascular imaging 2011 in the International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2012
    Review
  10. QCA, IVUS and OCT in interventional cardiology in 2011.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2011
    Review
  11. Dedicated bifurcation analysis: dedicated devices.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2011
    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

6 authors.

Joan C TuinenburgDivision of Image Processing, LKEB, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. J.C.Tuinenburg@lumc.nl
Gerhard Koning
Andrei Rareş
Johannes P Janssen
Alexandra J Lansky
Johan H C Reiber

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last several years significant interest has arisen in bifurcation stenting, in particular stimulated by the European Bifurcation Club. Traditional straight vessel analysis by QCA does not satisfy the requirements for such complex morphologies anymore. To come up with practical solutions, we have developed two models, a Y-shape and a T-shape model, suitable for bifurcation QCA analysis depending on the specific anatomy of the coronary bifurcation. The principles of these models are described in this paper, as well as the results of validation studies carried out on clinical materials. It can be concluded that the accuracy, precision and applicability of these new bifurcation analyses are conform the general guidelines that have been set many years ago for conventional QCA-analyses.

Indexed as

Coronary AngiographyRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedAngioplasty, Balloon, CoronaryCoronary Artery DiseaseHumansModels, CardiovascularPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisSeverity of Illness IndexSoftwareStents

Identifiers

PMID21327913
PMCPMC3078323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.