ArticleMedicine2017
Detection of very delayed coronary stent fracture using a novel fluoroscopic stent visualization technique against intravascular ultrasound: A case series.
Article in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Coronary Stent Fracture Causing Myocardial Infarction: Case Report and Review of Literature.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Stent Fractures: New Insights into an Old Issue.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleStent fracture has received increased concern as it may be an important risk factor for late stent failure, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is always recommended to confirm the diagnosis of stent fracture. StentBoost can detect stent fractures more easily due to the enhanced stent strut visibility, compared with coronary angiography (CAG). Few cases were reported to compare the advantages of StentBoost vis-à-vis IVUS in detecting stent fracture. PATIENT CONCERNS: We reported 3 cases that were confirmed the diagnosis of stent fracture by StentBoost, which were preliminarily suspected by angiography, including one case that lacked the IVUS evidence of stent fracture. DIAGNOSES: 3 cases of stent fracture presented with asymptomatic, angina and acute myocardial infarction, respectively.
interventionStents were implanted in the patients of case 2 and case 3, but the patient of case 1 was not given any intervention. OUTCOMES: No recurrent angina or myocardial infarction during outpatient follow-up. LESSONS: StentBoost may distinguish partial, complete, or multiple stent fracture, even which sometimes is not obvious in IVUS, StentBoost is a useful and handy tool for identifying the stent struts.
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.