ArticleIndian heart journal
Low major adverse cardiac event rates following bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: Impact of implantation technique on treatment outcomes.
Article in Indian heart journal. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveStudies conducted across the world have reported that the rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) following the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) are comparable to that noted with traditional drug eluting stents (DES). However, there is limited data on the immediate and medium-term clinical outcomes following the use of the Absorb BVS (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, SA) in the Indian context. This study was conducted to determine real-world evidence on the immediate and medium-term clinical outcomes in all patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the Absorb BVS.
methodsData of all patients who were treated with Absorb BVS at our center were evaluated. Between December 2012 and October 2016, 142 patients underwent PCI with BVS. The MACE rates during hospitalization, at 30days, 3 months, 6 months after PCI, and every 6 months thereafter were the primary endpoints evaluated with median follow up of 13 months.
resultsMean age of the study participants was 53.7±11.8years. Intravascular ultrasound imaging was performed in 15.34% of patients. Predilatation and postdilatation were performed in 81.8% and 84.6% of scaffolds, respectively. There were no episodes of MACE during hospitalization. However, 1 BVS-related MACE was observed at the 1-month (0.7%) as well as at the ≥12 month (0.8%) follow up visits. At the 6- and 12-month follow up visits, 2 (1.5%) and 3 (2.5%) non-BVS-related MACEs, respectively, were recorded.
conclusionThe use of Absorb BVS in this real-world experience was associated with very good immediate and medium-term clinical outcomes.
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.