Observational studyClinical cardiology2016
Two-Year Safety and Efficacy of Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stent Versus Second-Generation Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stent in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: Data from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR).
Observational study in Clinical cardiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Twenty-Year Clinical Experience of the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry.Korean circulation journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors at 17 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite improved long-term safety of biodegradable polymer (BP) drug-eluting stents (DES) compared to first-generation durable polymer (DP) DES, data on the safety and efficacy of BP-DES compared with second-generation (2G) DP-DES in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are limited. HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of BP-DES compared with 2G-DP-DES in the higher stent thrombosis (ST) risk setting of AMI.
methodsA total of 3359 AMI patients who received either BP-DES (n = 261) or 2G-DP-DES (n = 3098) were included from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR). Differences in baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were adjusted using a 1:5 propensity score matching analysis (n = 261 for BP-DES and n = 1305 for 2G-DP-DES). The primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (re-MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The rate of definite or probable ST was also investigated.
resultsIn adjusted analysis, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics; 2-year MACE (10.7% and 9.9% in the BP-DES group and 2G-DP-DES group, respectively, P = 0.679); ST incidence (0.8% vs 0.9%, respectively, P = 1.0), and rates of all-cause death, re-MI, and TVR. By multivariate analysis, old age, diabetes mellitus, renal dysfunction, and left ventricular dysfunction were the independent predictors of MACE after BP-DES or 2G-DP-DES implantation.
conclusionsBP-DES and 2G-DP-DES appear to have comparable 2-year safety and efficacy for the treatment of AMI. However, longer-term follow-up is needed.
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.