Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33297448›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020

Clinical Outcomes after Additional Dynamic Renal

Bachir Abdulrahman, Kambis Mashayekhi, Péter Tajti, Miroslaw Ferenc, Christian Marc Valina, Willibald Hochholzer, Franz-Josef Neumann, Thomas Georg Nührenberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Bachir AbdulrahmanDepartment for Cardiology and Angiology II, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, 79189 Bad Krozingen, Germany.
Kambis MashayekhiDepartment for Cardiology and Angiology II, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, 79189 Bad Krozingen, Germany.
Péter TajtiDepartment for Cardiology and Angiology II, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, 79189 Bad Krozingen, Germany.
Miroslaw FerencDepartment for Cardiology and Angiology II, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, 79189 Bad Krozingen, Germany.
Christian Marc ValinaDepartment for Cardiology and Angiology II, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, 79189 Bad Krozingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3900-3500
Willibald HochholzerDepartment for Cardiology and Angiology II, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, 79189 Bad Krozingen, Germany.
Franz-Josef NeumannDepartment for Cardiology and Angiology II, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, 79189 Bad Krozingen, Germany.
Thomas Georg NührenbergDepartment for Cardiology and Angiology II, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, 79189 Bad Krozingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterventional treatment of aorto-ostial coronary stenoses is limited by stent recoil and suboptimal angiographic results, leading to restenosis and frequent re-interventions. As a potential bail-out strategy for stent recoil, implantation of an additional stent to increase radial force has been reported. Thus, we sought to investigate clinical outcomes after additional implantation of a Dynamic Renal

methodsPatients treated by implantation of DRSs for stent recoil in the ostial right coronary artery or the left main stem were identified from the hospital database. Baseline clinical and procedural characteristics were compared to patients who underwent re-intervention for in-stent-restenosis in similar segments by either implantation of conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) or paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB). Clinical follow-ups were performed up to three years following re-intervention with the assessment of death, target lesion reintervention (TLR), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) as a combination death, myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization. Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed for event-free survival between the three groups.

resultsBetween 05/2013 and 07/2019, 28 patients underwent DRS implantation of aorto-ostial coronary lesions. In comparison with 49 patients with DES implantation and 29 patients undergoing PCB treatment, no relevant differences in baseline parameters were identified. Median follow-up was 714 days, with an available follow-up of >1 year after intervention in 82.1% of patients. In the entire study cohort at two years after re-intervention, the TLR rate was 16% (17 patients), the MACE rate 37% (39 patients), and all-cause mortality 9% (10 patients), with no significant differences between the three groups.

conclusionsDRS implantation for treating stent recoil of aorto-ostial coronary lesions resulted in a high rate of TLR, and was associated with similar risk for death and MACE compared to treatment of in-stent-restenosis with DES or PCB. Randomized, larger comparisons of contemporary DES in patients exclusively presenting with stent recoil are necessary to further define the efficacy and safety of this approach.

Indexed as

drug-eluting stentsDynamic Renalostial coronary lesionsstent recoil

Identifiers

PMID33297448
PMCPMC7762371

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.