ArticleNetherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation2018
Comparison between the STENTYS self-apposing bare metal and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents for the treatment of saphenous vein grafts (ADEPT trial).
Article in Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influences of Stent Design on In-Stent Restenosis and Major Cardiac Outcomes: A Scoping Review and Meta-Analysis.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2022Pooled it
- Self-Expanding Versus Balloon Expanding Coronary Stents in Intervention of the Degenerated Saphenous Vein Graft: Memmingen Coronary Artery Bypass Stenosis Trial (MECAST).Journal of interventional cardiology · 2023Trial
- Current Advances and Navigating the Complexities of SVG-PCI.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026Review
- Contemporary coronary artery bypass graft surgery and subsequent percutaneous revascularization.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2022Review
- Five-year clinical follow-up of the STENTYS self-apposing stent in complex coronary anatomy: a single-centre experience with report of specific angiographic indications.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2018Article
- Saphenous vein graft percutaneous coronary intervention : A different kind of animal.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo describe the safety and performance of STENTYS self-expandable bare metal stents (BMS) versus paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in saphenous vein grafts (SVGs). METHODS AND
resultsA randomised controlled trial was performed in four hospitals in three European countries between December 2011 and December 2013. Patients with de novo lesions (>50% stenosis) in an SVG with a diameter between 2.5-6 mm were included. Primary endpoint was late lumen loss at 6 months. Secondary endpoints included procedural success and the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 12 months. A total of 57 patients were randomised to STENTYS self-apposing BMS (n = 27) or PES (n = 30). Procedural success was obtained in 89.5%. No significant differences in late lumen loss were found between BMS and PES at 6 months (0.53 mm vs 0.47; p = 0.86). MACE rates at 12 months were comparable in both groups (BMS 22.2% vs. PES 26.7%; p = 0.70).
conclusionsTreatment of SVGs with STENTYS self-expandable stents is safe and effective. No significant differences were found in late lumen loss and MACE between BMS and PES.
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.