ReviewNature reviews. Cardiology2016
Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds - basic concepts and clinical outcome.
Review in Nature reviews. Cardiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 120 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds for percutaneous treatment of chronic total coronary occlusions: a meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2019Pooled it
- Long-term outcome of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds for the treatment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of RCTs.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2017Pooled it
- TLR2 inhibition attenuates NET-driven inflammation and restenosis during poly-lactic acid bioresorbable scaffold degradation.Bioactive materials · 2026Article
- Mechanically governed fracture resistance of biodegradable Zn-Cu alloy stents: Role of ring-length optimized structural design.Bioactive materials · 2026Article
- Physical Intelligence in Small-Scale Robots and Machines.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Review
- Effects of molecular weight, end group of polylactide and coating thickness on corrosion rate and inhomogeneity of iron under biomimetic conditions.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Article
- Pharmacological Foundation and Novel Insights of Resveratrol in Cardiovascular System: A Review.Current cardiology reviews · 2026Review
- Coronary Bifurcation PCI-Part II: Advanced Considerations.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Mechanically robust neuroprotective stent by sequential Mg ions release for ischemic stroke therapy.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Evaluation of FeMnN alloy bioresorbable flow diverting stents in the rabbit abdominal aorta.Bioactive materials · 2025Article
- Review
- Drug coated balloons in percutaneous coronary intervention: how can computational modelling help inform evolving clinical practice?Frontiers in medical technology · 2025Review
- A drug-free cardiovascular stent functionalized with tailored collagen supports in-situ healing of vascular tissues.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Absorbable metal stents for vascular use in pediatric cardiology: progress and outlook.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Advances in Fabrication Technologies for the Development of Next-Generation Cardiovascular Stents.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Review
- Bioresorbable flow diverters for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: review of current literature and future directions.Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2023Review
- Advances in the development of biodegradable coronary stents: A translational perspective.Materials today. Bio · 2022Review
- Yes-associated protein contributes to magnesium alloy-derivedinflammation in endothelial cells.Regenerative biomaterials · 2022Article
- Alleviation of Malathion Toxicity Effect byPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- PDLLA-Zn-nitrided Fe bioresorbable scaffold with 53-μm-thick metallic struts and tunable multistage biodegradation function.Science advances · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The introduction of percutaneous treatment of coronary artery stenosis with balloon angioplasty was the first revolution in interventional cardiology; the advent of metallic coronary stents (bare and drug-eluting) marked the second and third revolutions. However, the latest generation of drug-eluting stents is limited by several factors. Permanent vessel caging impairs arterial physiology, and the incidence of very late stent thrombosis - although lower with the second generation than with the first generation of drug-eluting stents - remains a major concern. This complication is mainly related to the presence of permanent metallic implants, chronic degeneration triggered by an inflammatory response to the coating polymer, and/or adverse effects of antiproliferative drugs on endothelial regeneration. In 2011, self-degrading coronary stents - the bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) - were introduced into clinical practice, showing good short-term results owing to their adequate strength. The advantage of these devices is the transient nature of vascular scaffolding, which avoids permanent vessel caging. In this Review, we summarize the latest research on BVS, with a particular emphasis on the implantation technique (which is different from that used with metallic stents) to outline the concept that BVS deployment methods have a major effect on procedural success and prognosis of patients with coronary artery stenosis. Furthermore, the clinical outcome of BVS in randomized clinical trials and in phase IV studies are discussed in different pathophysiological settings, such as stable or acute coronary disease. Finally, all the available data on the safety profile of BVS regarding scaffold thrombosis are discussed.
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.