ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2016
The fate of small side branches following drug eluting stent implantation.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAlthough drug eluting stents (DES) have documented convenience in bifurcation lesions, possible unfavorable effects on small side branch ostium (SBO) remain a question. We aimed to explore the effects of DES on small jailed SBs (1.5-2.25 mm) which originated from the lesion on the main vessel and were not treated with either stenting or balloon dilatation.
methodsAngiographic data of 107 consecutive patients (129 SB) with Medina 1,1,1 or 1,1,0 lesions were evaluated at the time of procedure and at the follow-up.
resultsOf all DES used, 70 (54.7%) was sirolimus-eluting, 39 (30.5%) was paclitaxel-eluting and 20 (14.8%) was zotarolimus-eluting. The diameter of SBs was 1.84 ± 0.41 mm with a stenosis of 20.7 ± 26.6% at SBO at baseline. The lesion at the SBO had progressed after the procedure when the pre vs postprocedure values and follow-up vs pre-procedure values are compared (20.7 ± 26.6% vs 29.4 ± 27.4%; p < 0.0001 and 25.4 ± 25.1 vs 20.7 ± 26.6%; p = 0.004 respectively). A significant reduction in stenosis was revealed over the follow-up (29.4 ± 27.4 vs 25.4 ± 25.1 respectively; p = 0.013). The severity of the disease at the SBO at baseline was the only parameter that affected the severity of SB stenosis in acute, longterm and follow-up. Additional parameters with influence on SB patency at different times were female gender, stent deployment with low pressure, cTFC of the main lesion, age, cTFC of the lesion, late loss index and the preprocedure TIMI flow grade of the SB.
conclusionsAlthough there was a significant deterioration of SBO immediately after stenting, follow-up data showed that the lesion at SBO improved but remained worse than baseline.
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.