ArticleMedicine2018
Branch ostial optimization treatment and optimized provisional t-stenting with polymeric bioresorbable scaffolds: Ex-vivo morphologic and hemodynamic examination.
Article in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Five-year outcomes of double kissing mini-culotte stenting vs. mini-culotte stenting using drug-eluting stents for the treatment of true coronary bifurcation lesions.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Simple Stenting Strategy with or without Branch Ostial Optimization Technique for Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The optimal side-branch (SB) ostium treatment after provisional side-branch scaffolding remains a subject of debate in bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) era. In this study, we evaluated a novel optimized provisional T-stenting technique (OPT) and assessed its feasibility by comparison with T and small protrusion technique (TAP).Two provisional SB scaffolding techniques (OPT, n = 5; TAP, n = 5) were performed using polymeric BVS in a bifurcated phantom. The sequential intermediate snuggling balloon dilation, also called ostial optimal technique, was added to OPT but not TAP to dilate the side-branch ostium while the final snuggling balloon dilation applied for both procedures. Microcomputed tomography (microCT) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) were performed to assess morphology, and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) was performed to assess hemodynamics in the scaffolded bifurcations. Compared with TAP in microCT analysis, OPT created shorter neo-carina length than TAP (0.34 ± 0.10 mm vs 1.02 ± 0.26 mm, P < .01), longer valgus struts length (2.49 ± 0.27 mm vs 1.78 ± 0.33 mm, P < .01) with larger MB ostial area (9.46 ± 0.04 mm vs 8.34 ± 0.09 mm, P < .01). OCT found that OPT significantly decreased the struts mal-apposition (13.20 ± 0.16% vs 1.94 ± 0.54%, P < .01). CFD revealed that OPT generated more favorable flow pattern than TAP, as indicated by less percent (4.68 ± 1.40% vs 8.88 ± 1.21%, P < .01) of low wall shear stress (<0.4 Pa) along the lateral walls.By using BVSs for bifurcation intervention, the sequential intermediate snuggling balloon dilation is feasible for optimizing ostial SB and facilitating subsequent SB scaffolding. Results show OPT is better than TAP for bifurcated morphology and hemodynamics in this ex-vivo study.
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.