Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31014237›Full record

SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2019

Cardiovascular outcomes associated with crush versus provisional stenting techniques for bifurcation lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Feng Huang, Zu-Chun Luo

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Feng HuangInstitute of Cardiovascular Diseases and Guangxi Key Laboratory Base of Precision Medicine in Cardio-cerebrovascular Disease Control and Prevention and Guangxi Clinical Research Center for Cardio-cerebrovascular Diseases, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi, China. huangfeng7925@163.com.ORCID 0000-0002-3269-7530
Zu-Chun LuoDepartment of Internal Medicine Education, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi, China.
Guangxi Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for bifurcation lesions has often been challenging for Interventionists. Application of the correct intra-procedural technique is vital to generate beneficial outcomes after PCI. We aimed to systematically compare the post interventional cardiovascular outcomes which were reported using crush versus provisional stenting techniques for bifurcation lesions.

methodsA computerized search was carried out through Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central and through www.ClinicalTrials.gov for English publications comparing crush versus the provisional stenting techniques for coronary bifurcation lesions during PCI. Major adverse cardiac events, all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target vessel and target lesion revascularizations were the endpoints in this analysis. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were generated during statistical analysis to represent the data.

resultsSix studies consisting of a total number of 2220 participants (1085 participants were assigned to the crush stenting technique and 1135 participants were assigned to the provisional stenting technique) enrolled between years 2004 and 2016 were included in this analysis. During a follow-up time period from six to sixty months, major adverse cardiac events (OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.59-0.91; P = 0.005), target vessel revascularization (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.43-0.89; P = 0.01) and target lesion revascularization (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.45-0.85; P = 0.003) were significantly lower in patients who were assigned to the crush stenting technique. However, all-cause mortality (OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.48-1.68; P = 0.74), cardiac death (OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.29-1.08; P = 0.08), myocardial infarction (OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.62-1.27; P = 0.53) and stent thrombosis (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.36-1.42; P = 0.34) were not significantly different.

conclusionIn patients with coronary bifurcation lesions undergoing PCI, crush stenting technique was associated with significantly lower major adverse cardiac events and repeated revascularization without any change in mortality, myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis when compared to the provisional technique showing a benefit of crush over the provisional stenting technique during PCI.

Indexed as

AgedCoronary Artery DiseaseCoronary ThrombosisFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionPercutaneous Coronary InterventionRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsStentsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeCoronary bifurcation lesionsCrush stenting techniqueMajor adverse cardiac eventsPercutaneous coronary interventionProvisional stenting techniqueRepeated revascularization

Identifiers

PMID31014237
PMCPMC6480619
OpenAlexW2945986389

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.