ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2019
Long-term results after PCI of unprotected distal left main coronary artery stenosis: the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen (BBK)-Left Main Registry.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Stepwise ProvisionalReviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Pooled it
- One- and 3-year outcomes of percutaneous bifurcation left main revascularization with modern drug-eluting stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2021Pooled it
- Longitudinal outcomes of final kissing balloon inflation in coronary bifurcation lesions treated with a single stent.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Comparing the clinical outcomes of single vs. systematic dual stenting strategies for unprotected left main bifurcation lesion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Percutaneous coronary artery intervention in unprotected left main coronary artery disease: one-year outcome Egyptian registry.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2022Article
- Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting in Patients Disqualified from Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: Latest Evidence.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2020Review
- Polyhedral erythrocytes in intracoronary thrombus and their association with reperfusion in myocardial infarction.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2019Article
- The year in cardiology 2018: coronary interventions.European heart journal · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsPercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of unprotected distal left main stenosis (UDLM) is increasingly performed as an alternative to surgical treatment. The optimal strategy for stenting in this setting is still a matter of debate. Therefore, this analysis investigated the long-term clinical outcome of a single- versus a double-stenting strategy for treatment of UDLM. METHODS AND
resultsFrom a large registry, 867 consecutive patients with UDLM undergoing either single or double stenting with drug-eluting stents (DES) were identified. Follow-up was up to 10 (median 3.1, interquartile range 1.1-5.3) years. Primary endpoint was MACE consisting of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion re-intervention (TLR). Secondary clinical endpoints included these single endpoints and stent thrombosis. MACE occurred in 41.5% after single and in 49.0% after double stenting (P = 0.03). TLR was lower after single (17.4%) as compared to double stenting (27.2%; P < 0.01). Between single and double stenting, there were no significant differences for death (26.4 versus 23.3%; P = 0.31), death or myocardial infarction (29.1 versus 27.2%; P = 0.55), or definite/probable stent thrombosis (1.3 versus 2.1%; P = 0.42).
conclusionsCompared with single stenting, double stenting was associated with a significantly higher long-term risk of MACE. This was driven by a higher incidence of TLR, whereas the risk of death, MI, or stent thrombosis was similar between the two strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30051181What 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.