Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32963824›Full record

ArticleCardiology research and practice2020

Balloon Deflation Strategy during Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial and Numerical Simulation-Based Analysis.

Jun Gu, Yang Zhuo, Tian-Jiao Liu, Jie Li, Zhao-Fang Yin, Zuo-Jun Xu, Li Fan, Qing He, Kan Chen, Hua-Su Zeng and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiology research and practice, 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
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jun GuDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yang ZhuoDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Tian-Jiao LiuDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jie LiSchool of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
Zhao-Fang YinDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Zuo-Jun XuDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Li FanDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Qing HeDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Kan ChenDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Hua-Su ZengDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xiao-Fei WangDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yu-Qi FanDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jun-Feng ZhangDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Fu-You LiangSchool of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5012-486X
Chang-Qian WangDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9942-7327
Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital · CNSechenov University · RUShanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the best available reperfusion strategy in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, PCI is associated with a serious problem known as no-reflow phenomenon, resulting in poor clinical and functional outcomes. This study aimed to compare the influences of different balloon deflation velocity on coronary flow and cardiovascular events during primary PCI in STEM as well as transient hemodynamic changes in in vitro experiments.

conclusionThis randomized study demonstrated that the slow balloon deflation during stent implantation improved coronary flow and reduced infarct size in reperfused STEMI. The change of flow in the balloon-vessel gap and WSS resulted from different balloon deflation velocity might be partly accounted for this results.

Identifiers

PMID32963824
PMCPMC7492947
OpenAlexW3084376304

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.