ArticleJournal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis2016
Impact of Distal Protection with Filter-Type Device on Long-term Outcome after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Myocardial Infarction: Clinical Results with Filtrap
Article in Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- No-Reflow During Coronary Interventions: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Additive Prognostic Value of Carotid Plaque Score to Enhance the Age, Creatinine, and Ejection Fraction Score in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome.Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2018Article
- Thrombus Formation and Propagation in the Onset of Cardiovascular Events.Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2018Review
- Article
- Distal Protection During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction.Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2016Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimAlthough distal embolization during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) deteriorates cardiac function, whether distal protection (DP) can improve prognosis is still controversial. We investigated whether a filter-type DP device, Filtrap
methodWe studied 164 patients (130 men, mean age: 65.7 years) who underwent PCI. Patients were divided into two groups based on the use of Filtrap
resultBetween DP (n=53, 41 men, mean age: 65.5 years) and non-DP (n=111, 89 men, mean age: 65.8 years) groups, although there was significantly greater plaque area in the DP group than in the non-DP group, there were no significant differences in coronary reperfusion flow after PCI. Interestingly, patients with CHF in the non-DP group exhibited a higher CK level than those in the DP group. During a 2-year follow-up period, cumulative CHF was significantly lower in the DP group than in the non-DP group (log-rank p=0.018), and there was no significant difference in the MACE rate (log-rank p=0.238). The use of DP device could not predict MACE, but could predict CHF by multivariate analysis (odds ratio=0.099, 95% CI: 0.02-0.42, p=0.005).
conclusionThese results demonstrate that favorable clinical outcomes could be achieved by the filter-type DP device in AMI, particularly in patients with CHF.
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.