ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2019
Incidental Finding of Strut Malapposition Is a Predictor of Late and Very Late Thrombosis in Coronary Bioresorbable Scaffolds.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Underlying Plaque Characteristics Following the Third-Generation Resorbable Magnesium Scaffold Implantation: An Intravascular OCT Assessment up to 12-Months.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
- Outcomes of the two generations of bioresorbable scaffolds (Magmaris vs. Absorb) in acute coronary syndrome in routine clinical practice.Cardiology journal · 2022Article
- Optical coherence tomography: evaluating the effects of stent boost subtract imaging on stent underexpansion in STEMI patients.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2022Observational
- [Structural design and biomechanical numerical analysis of body-fitted stent in stenotic vessels].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2021Article
- Clinical presentation does not affect acute mechanical performance of the Novolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold as assessed by optical coherence tomography.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2021Article
- Acute Mechanical Performance of Magmaris vs. DESolve Bioresorbable Scaffolds in a Real-World Scenario.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Article
- The Bioengineered Combo Dual-Therapy CD34 Antibody-Covered Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent in Patients with Chronic Total Occlusion Evaluated by Clinical Outcome and Optical Coherence Tomography Imaging Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Five Years Outcomes and Predictors of Events in a Single-Center Cohort of Patients Treated with Bioresorbable Coronary Vascular Scaffolds.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
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
Malapposition is a common finding in stent and scaffold thrombosis (ScT). Evidence from studies with prospective follow-up, however, is scarce. We hypothesized that incidental observations of strut malapposition might be predictive of late ScT during subsequent follow-up. One hundred ninety-seven patients were enrolled in a multicentre registry with prospective follow-up. Optical coherence tomography (OCT), performed in an elective setting, was available in all at 353 (0-376) days after bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) implantation. Forty-four patients showed evidence of malapposition that was deemed not worthy of intervention. Malapposition was not associated with any clinical or procedural parameter except for a higher implantation pressure (
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.