Observational studyBMC cardiovascular disorders2016
Mechanical properties of the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold compared to the metallic everolimus-eluting stent.
Observational study in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bioresorbable vascular stents and drug-eluting stents in treatment of coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Advances in the development of biodegradable coronary stents: A translational perspective.Materials today. Bio · 2022Review
- Bio-Performance of Hydrothermally and Plasma-Treated Titanium: The New Generation of Vascular Stents.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Long-term follow-up of therapeutic efficacy of everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold in comparison to everolimus-eluting stent in treatment of chronic total occlusion guided by intracoronary imaging.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2020Article
- Mechanical behavior of polymer-basedJournal of thoracic disease · 2017Review
- Balloon postdilatation is a mandatory step in the deployment of bioresorbable vascular scaffold.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2017Article
- Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds - basic concepts and clinical outcome.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEverolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) represent an innovative treatment option for coronary artery disease. Clinical and angiographic results seem promising, however, data on its immediate procedural performance are still scarce. The aim of our study was to assess the mechanical properties of BVS by Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) in clinical routine.
methodsPost-implantation OCT images of 40 BVS were retrospectively compared to those of 40 metallic everolimus-eluting stents (EES). Post-procedural device related morphological features were assessed. This included incidences of gross underexpansion and the stent eccentricity index (SEI, minimum/maximum diameter) as a measure for focal radial strength.
resultsPatients receiving BVS were younger than those with EES (54.0 ± 11.2 years versus 61.7 ± 11.4 years, p = 0.012), the remaining baseline, vessel and lesion characteristics were comparable between groups. Lesion pre-dilatation was more frequently performed and inflation time was longer in the BVS than in the EES group (n = 34 versus n = 23, p = 0.006 and 44.2 ± 12.8 versus 25.6 ± 8.4 seconds, p < 0.001, respectively). There were no significant differences in maximal inflation pressures and post-dilatation frequencies with non-compliant balloons between groups. Whereas gross device underexpansion was not significantly different, SEI was significantly lower in the BVS group (n = 12 (30 %) versus n = 14 (35 %), p = 0.812 and 0.69 ± 0.08 versus 0.76 ± 0.09, p < 0.001, respectively). There was no difference in major adverse cardiac event-rate at six months.
conclusionOur data show that focal radial expansion was significantly reduced in BVS compared to EES in a clinical routine setting using no routine post-dilatation protocol. Whether these findings have impact on scaffold mid-term results as well as on clinical outcome has to be investigated in larger, randomized trials.
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.