Trial reportCatheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions2021
Comparison of 6-month vascular healing response after bioresorbable polymer versus durable polymer drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A randomized serial optical coherence tomography study.
Trial report in Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of 6-month vascular healing response after bioresorbable polymer versus durable polymer drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A randomized serial optical coherence tomography study.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2021Trial
- Exercise After Coronary Stenting: Potential Effects on in-Stent Restenosis.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2026Review
- OLD-TAVR score to predict 2-year mortality in patients aged 75 years and more undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.European geriatric medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study was conducted to use optical coherence tomography (OCT) to compare vascular healing between bioresorbable polymer (BP) and durable polymer (DP) everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS).
backgroundWhether BP-EES induce better vascular healing compared to contemporary DP-EES remains controversial, especially for ACS.
methodsIn this prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial, we used OCT to compare 6-month vascular healing in patients with ACS randomized to BP versus DP-EES: percent strut coverage (primary endpoint, non-inferiority margin of 2.0%) and neointimal thickness and percent neointimal hyperplasia (NIH) volume. As an exploratory analysis, morphological factors related to the endpoints and the effect of underlying lipidic plaque on stent healing were evaluated.
resultsA total of 104 patients with ACS were randomly assigned to BP-EES (n = 52) versus DP-EES (n = 52). Of these, 86 patients (40 BP-EES and 46 DP-EES) were included in the final OCT analyses. Six-month percent strut coverage of BP-EES (83.6 ± 11.4%) was not non-inferior compared to those of DP-EES (81.6 ± 13.9%), difference 2.0% (lower 95% confidence interval-2.6%), p
conclusionsSix-month strut coverage of BP-EES was not non-inferior compared to those of DP-EES in ACS patients. Good stent apposition and expansion were independently associated with better vascular healing.
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.