Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33313234›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2020

Three-year clinical outcomes of a sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (XINSORB) and a metallic stent to treat coronary artery stenosis.

Yizhe Wu, Zhifeng Yao, Jiasheng Yin, Jiahui Chen, Juying Qian, Li Shen, Lei Ge, Junbo Ge

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Bioresorbable coronary scaffolds are ready for a comeback: pros and cons.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yizhe WuShanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Zhifeng YaoShanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Jiasheng YinShanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Jiahui ChenShanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Juying QianShanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Li ShenShanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Lei GeShanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Junbo GeShanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Cardiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Zhongshan Hospital · CNFudan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent studies have shown increased risks of late target lesion failure (TLF) and thrombosis using a bioresorbable scaffold (BRS). However, the results of the ABSORB China study offered a different means of understanding the long-term performance of BRSs. We tested the 3-year clinical outcome of the XINSORB BRS in a multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial (ChiCTR1800014966).

methodsEligible patients with one or two

resultsThree hundred ninety-five patients were enrolled and randomized to the XINSORB (N=200) and SES (N=195) arms. The clinical 3-year follow-up included 95.5% of the XINSORB-treated patients and 92.8% of the SES-treated patients. Dual antiplatelet therapy was at 59.0% of the XINSORB-treated and 52.8% of the SES-treated patients (P=0.34). There were no significant differences in the clinical outcomes between the XINSORB and SES arms, including in TLF (4.0%

conclusionsIn this XINSORB randomized clinical trial, the XINSORB scaffolds and SESs showed similar efficacy and safety up to the 3-year follow-up. The rates of TLF and device thrombosis were low and comparable between the two arms.

Indexed as

bioresorbable scaffold (BRS)Coronary artery diseasepercutaneous coronary intervention

Identifiers

PMID33313234
PMCPMC7729338
OpenAlexW3106859658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.