ReviewPakistan journal of medical sciences
Association of smoking with restenosis and major adverse cardiac events after coronary stenting: A meta-analysis.
Review in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Peri-procedural stroke or death in stenting of symptomatic severe intracranial stenosis.Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2020Trial
- Association between systemic immune-inflammation index and systemic inflammation response index and in-stent restenosis in patients with hypertension complicated by coronary heart disease.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- One-year outcomes and predictive factors for primary patency after stent placement for treatment of central venous occlusive disease in hemodialysis patients.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2022Article
- Primary percutaneous coronary intervention in CAD patients: A comparison of major adverse cardiovascular events of second- and third-generation drug-eluting stents.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Impact of free thyroxine levels and other clinical factors on bare metal stent restenosis.Archives of endocrinology and metabolismArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveThe association between smoking and clinical outcomes after coronary stenting is controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the association between smoking and in stent restenosis (ISR), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), or major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) after coronary stenting.
methodsA search for studies published before December 2014 was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library. An inverse random weighted meta-analysis was conducted using logarithm of the odds ratio (OR) and its standard error for each study.
resultsTen studies investigated the association between smoking and ISR. Overall, smoking was not associated with ISR (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.79-1.41; I(2) = 47.8%). Subgroup analysis also failed to show a significant association between smoking and ISR risk regardless of bare metal stent (BMS) and drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. Eight studies explored the association between smoking and MACE, but no association was found (OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.77-1.10; I(2) = 25.5%), and subgroup analysis revealed that no distinct difference was found between BMS and DES implantation. Three studies investigated the association between smoking and MACCE and significant association was found (OR: 2.09, 95% CI: 1.43-3.06; I(2) = 21.6%).
conclusionsOur results suggest that in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation, smoking is not associated with ISR and MACE; however, smoking is an independent risk factor for MACCE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.