ReviewRambam Maimonides medical journal2020
Modern Stents: Where Are We Going?
Review in Rambam Maimonides medical journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The clinical and physiological profiles of kissing stents in endovascular reconstruction of aortoiliac occlusive disease.Experimental physiology · 2026Review
- A wireless power transfer system for leadless endovascular electrocorticography.Communications engineering · 2026Article
- Impact of the number of modifiable risk factors on clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: An analysis from the e-Ultimaster registry.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2024Article
- Coatings for Cardiovascular Stents-An Up-to-Date Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Safe and effective profile of the VSTENT bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of patients withCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2023Article
- Impact of multisite artery disease on clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: an analysis from the e-Ultimaster registry.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2023Article
- Applying Principles of Regenerative Medicine to Vascular Stent Development.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Cardiovascular Stents: A Review of Past, Current, and Emerging Devices.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Targeting the epigenome in in-stent restenosis: from mechanisms to therapy.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronary artery stenting is the treatment of choice for patients requiring coronary angioplasty. We describe the major advancements with this technology. There have been significant developments in the design of stents and adjunctive medical therapies. Newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have almost negligible restenosis rates and, when combined with proper anti-platelet treatment and optimal deployment, a low risk of stent thrombosis. The introduction of newer-generation DES with thinner stent struts, novel durable or biodegradable polymer coatings, and new antiproliferative agents has further improved the safety profile of early-generation DES. In parallel the effectiveness has been kept, with a significant reduction in the risk of target lesion revascularization compared with the early-generation DES. However, to date, the development of completely bioresorbable vascular scaffolds has failed to achieve further clinical benefits and has been associated with increased thrombosis. Newer-generation DES-including both durable polymer as well as biodegradable polymer-have become the standard of care in all patient and lesion subsets, with excellent long-term results.
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.