ArticleAnatolian journal of cardiology2016
What is better for predilatation in bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: a non-compliant or a compliant balloon?
Article in Anatolian journal of cardiology, 2016. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Outcomes of a Non-Compliant Balloon Dilatation Catheter: MOZEC™ NC Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- The use of semi-compliant versus non-compliant balloon systems for predilatation during the implantation of self-expandable transcatheter aortic valves: Data from the VIenna CardioThOracic Aortic Valve RegistrY (VICTORY).European journal of clinical investigation · 2021Article
- Balloon postdilatation is a mandatory step in the deployment of bioresorbable vascular scaffold.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2017Article
- Author`s Reply.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2017Article
- Procedural and one-year clinical outcomes of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds for the treatment of chronic total occlusions: a single-centre experience.Cardiovascular journal of AfricaArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on byAuthor`s Reply.2017
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe bioresorbable vascular scaffold system (BVS) is a fully absorbable vascular treatment system. In this study, we aimed to compare the periprocedural effectiveness and long term results of non-compliant balloon (NCB) and compliant balloon (CB) systems, which are used for predilatation before BVS implantation.
methodsOne hundred forty-six BVS-treated lesions from 119 patients were retrospectively analyzed in the study. Patients with acute coronary syndrome, stable angina and silent ischemia were included in the study. Lesions and patients were categorized into the NCB and CB groups according to the type of balloon used for predilatation. NCB was implemented on 72 lesions (59 patients) and CB was implemented on 74 lesions (60 patients). The two groups were compared on terms of procedural features and both in-hospital and 1-year clinical follow-up results. Chi-square and independent sample t test were performed for statistical analysis.
resultsThere was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of patient characteristics and lesion properties. The number of postdilated lesions was significantly higher in the CB group. Procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume were significantly lower in the NCB group. At follow-up, one patient had myocardial infarction in the CB group because of scaffold thrombosis and no mortality was observed.
conclusionPredilatation with NCB before BVS implantation reduces the need for postdilatation. In addition, use of NCB reduces the procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume but had no effect on 1 year clinical follow-up results compared with CB.
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.