Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30581571›Full record

ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2019

Polymer-free versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis.

James J Wu, Joshua A H Way, Leonard Kritharides, David Brieger

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Drug-Eluting Stents: Technical and Clinical Progress.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  5. A prospective, multicentre first-in-man study of the polymer-free ultrathin-strut BIOrapid stent (BIOVITESSE).EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

James J WuSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.
Joshua A H WaySydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.
Leonard KritharidesSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.
David BriegerSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPolymer-free drug-eluting stents (PF-DES) were introduced with the aim of reducing the risk of stent thrombosis associated with durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES). The comparison of safety and efficacy profiles between these two stent platforms remains unclear. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted electronic database searches for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing patients treated with either PF-DES or DP-DES. Outcomes included definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST), myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death, all-cause death, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). A random-effects model was used to derive risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses based on different variables were also performed. After screening a total of 1026 articles, the present meta-analysis included 13 RCTs comprising 8021 patients.

resultsNo significant differences were found for the risks of definite or probable ST (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.62-1.43;

conclusionsOur findings showed that PF-DES and DP-DES confer equivalent safety and efficacy profiles, with similar rates of stent thrombosis.

Indexed as

Coronary artery diseaseDrug-eluting stentsDurable polymerMeta-analysisPolymer-free

Identifiers

PMID30581571
PMCPMC6302254
OpenAlexW2905286370

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.