ArticleActa Cardiologica Sinica2021
Comparison of Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Bioresorbable Scaffolds between Patients with and without Diabetes Mellitus.
Article in Acta Cardiologica Sinica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mid-term safety and efficacy of magnesium bioresorbable vascular scaffolds - magmaris in diabetic population. 2-Years outcome in acute coronary syndrome cohort.Diabetes & vascular disease researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDiabetes mellitus (DM) is a major risk of cardiovascular events. Bioresorbable stent frame materials capable of providing mechanical support and drug-delivery functions have been developed in an attempt to improve long-term outcomes. However, publications about the long-term outcomes of bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) in DM patients are still limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of BRS between patients with and without diabetes.
methodsData regarding BRS placement in consecutive patients receiving percutaneous coronary interventions were collected from the cardiovascular center of a single tertiary medical center from 2014 to 2017.
resultsA total of 138 cases were included and followed up for 4 years. The mortality rate was 1.1% in the non-diabetic group and 4.1% in the diabetic group (p = 0.2542). No cardiac mortality was observed. One patient had an acute myocardial infarction (0.7%) in the non-diabetic group. The rate of target lesion revascularization was 3.4% in the non-diabetic group and 4.08% in the diabetic group. The ratio of target vessel revascularization was 6.74% in the non-diabetic group and 4.1% in the diabetic group.
conclusionsThis study demonstrated no significant difference in long-term outcomes after BRS implantation between patients with and without diabetes in a single tertiary medical center.
Indexed as
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.