ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2020
A comparison of procedural success rate and long-term clinical outcomes between in-stent restenosis chronic total occlusion and de novo chronic total occlusion using multicenter registry data.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of drug-coated balloon angioplasty for treatment of both de novo and in-stent coronary chronic total occlusions.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Pooled it
- Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for In-Stent Restenosis Versus De Novo Lesions: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Pooled it
- SMPD1-mediated sphingolipid metabolism dysregulation in predicting and preventing in-stent restenosis of coronary heart disease patients.Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2026Article
- Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes for in-Stent vs de Novo Chronic Total Occlusions: A Meta-Analysis.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2026Review
- Remnant Cholesterol as a Predictor of Target-Vessel Failure in Patients With In-Stent Restenosis.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Impact of quantitative flow ratio on outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total occlusion.Heart and vessels · 2025Observational
- Recent Advances in the Treatment of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Effects of a prior failed attempt on the outcomes of subsequent chronic total occlusion-percutaneous coronary intervention.Aging medicine (Milton (N.S.W)) · 2024Article
- Instent CTO-What Is the Best Treatment Strategy?Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2024Article
- Predictive value of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in coronary chronic total occlusion patients.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2024Article
- Clinical Outcome of Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon Angioplasty Versus Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for the Treatment of Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent In-Stent Chronic Total Occlusion.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2023Article
- Is it the Time to Move Towards Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? The Pros and Cons.Current cardiology reviews · 2023Review
- Management of in-stent restenosis.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2022Article
- Occlusion patterns, strategies and procedural outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention for in-stent chronic total occlusion.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2021Article
- In-stent CTOs: same story with a different conclusion?EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2021Article
- The therapeutic effects of excimer laser coronary atherectomy therapy for in-stent restenosis chronic total occlusions.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2021Article
- Factors Influencing Stent Failure in Chronic Total Occlusion Coronary Intervention.Interventional cardiology (London, England) · 2021Review
- Procedural Results and Long-Term Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for in-Stent Restenosis Chronic Total Occlusion Compared with de novo Chronic Total Occlusion.International journal of general medicine · 2021Article
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
backgroundThere have been little data about outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for in-stent restenosis (ISR) chronic total occlusion (CTO) in the drug eluting stent (DES) era. This study aimed to compare the procedural success rate and long-term clinical outcomes of ISR CTO and de novo CTO. METHODS AND
resultsPatients who underwent PCI for ISR CTO (n = 164) versus de novo CTO (n = 1208) were enrolled from three centers in Korea between January 2008 and December 2014. Among a total of ISR CTO, a proportion of DES ISR CTO was 79.3% (n = 130). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs); a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Following propensity score-matching (1:3), the ISR CTO group (n = 156) had a higher success rate (84.6% vs. 76.0%, p = 0.035), mainly driven by high success rate of PCI for DES ISR CTO (88.6%), but showed a higher incidence of MACEs [hazard ratio (HR): 2.06; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37-3.09; p < 0.001], mainly driven by higher prevalence of MI [HR: 9.71; 95% CI 2.06-45.81; p = 0.004] and TLR [HR: 3.04; 95% CI 1.59-5.81; p = 0.001], during 5 years of follow-up after successful revascularization, as compared to the de novo CTO group (n = 408).
conclusionThe procedural success rate was higher in the ISR CTO than the de novo CTO, especially in DES ISR CTO. However, irrespective of successful revascularization, the long-term clinical outcomes for the ISR CTO were significantly worse than those for the de novo CTO, in terms of MI and TLR.
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.