Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29627909›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in cardiovascular medicine2018

Technological Advances in Stent Therapies: a Year in Review.

Jad Raffoul, Ammar Nasir, Andrew J P Klein

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 94% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jad RaffoulSt. Louis University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
Ammar NasirSt. Louis University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
Andrew J P KleinSt. Louis University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA. Andrew.Klein@piedmont.org.
Saint Louis University · USVA St. Louis Health Care System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stent technology has rapidly evolved since the first stainless steel bare metal stents with substantial developments in scaffolding, polymer, drug choice, drug delivery, and elution mechanisms. Most recently, there has been the evolution of bioabsorbable vascular scaffolds, potentially eliminating the need for long-term foreign object retention. These rapid developments have led to an ever-expanding selection of new stents, making the choice of which to use in which patient challenging. Operators must balance potential short- and long-term clinical ramifications, namely stent thrombosis, in-stent restenosis, target lesion revascularization, and target lesion failure. In this review, we hope to provide insight for interventional cardiologists on the details of stent technology and how this impacts outcomes, stent selection, and duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy duration post drug-eluting stent implantation.

Indexed as

Coronary artery diseaseDual-antiplatelet therapyStent therapyTarget lesion failureTarget lesion revascularization

Identifiers

PMID29627909
OpenAlexW2796241522

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.