Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32780336›Full record

ReviewNetherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation2020

The 2010s in clinical drug-eluting stent and bioresorbable scaffold research: a Dutch perspective.

H Kawashima, P Zocca, R A Buiten, P C Smits, Y Onuma, J J Wykrzykowska, R J de Winter, C von Birgelen, P W Serruys

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Ethnic minorities treated with new-generation drug-eluting coronary stents in two European randomised clinical trials.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2024
    Article
  3. 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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

H KawashimaDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Cardiology, Heart Center, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
P ZoccaDepartment of Cardiology, Thoraxcentrum Twente, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
R A BuitenDepartment of Cardiology, Thoraxcentrum Twente, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
P C SmitsDepartment of Cardiology, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Y OnumaDepartment of Cardiology, National University of Ireland, Galway (NUIG), Galway, Ireland.
J J WykrzykowskaDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Cardiology, Heart Center, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
R J de WinterDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Cardiology, Heart Center, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
C von BirgelenDepartment of Cardiology, Thoraxcentrum Twente, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
P W SerruysDepartment of Cardiology, National University of Ireland, Galway (NUIG), Galway, Ireland. patrick.w.j.c.serruys@gmail.com.
Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway · IEUniversity of Twente · NLAmsterdam Neuroscience · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLMaasstad Ziekenhuis · NLMedisch Spectrum Twente · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dutch researchers were among the first to perform clinical studies in bare metal coronary stents, the use of which was initially limited by a high incidence of in-stent restenosis. This problem was greatly solved by the introduction of drug-eluting stents (DES). Nevertheless, enthusiasm about first-generation DES was subdued by discussions about a higher risk of very-late stent thrombosis and mortality, which stimulated the development, refinement, and rapid adoption of new DES with more biocompatible durable polymer coatings, biodegradable polymer coatings, or no coating at all. In terms of clinical DES research, the 2010s were characterised by numerous large-scale randomised trials in all-comers and patients with minimal exclusion criteria. Bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) were developed and investigated. The Igaki-Tamai scaffold without drug elution was clinically tested in the Netherlands in 1999, followed by an everolimus-eluting BRS (Absorb) which showed favourable imaging and clinical results. Afterwards, multiple clinical trials comparing Absorb and its metallic counterpart were performed, revealing an increased rate of scaffold thrombosis during follow-up. Based on these studies, the commercialisation of the device was subsequently halted. Novel technologies are being developed to overcome shortcomings of first-generation BRS. In this narrative review, we look back on numerous devices and on the DES and BRS trials reported by Dutch researchers.

Indexed as

All-comer(s)Bioresorbable scaffoldDrug-eluting stentPercutaneous coronary interventionRandomised trial

Identifiers

PMID32780336
PMCPMC7419418
OpenAlexW3048753101

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.