ReviewStem cell reviews and reports2022
Development of In Vitro Endothelialised Stents - Review.
Review in Stem cell reviews and reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Combined Prognostic Value of Triglyceride-Glucose Index and Bilirubin in Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis: From Clinical Risk Stratification to Exploratory Vascular-Cell Findings.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2026Article
- Evolutions in Cardiovascular Implants-A Review of Past, Present, and Future.Micromachines · 2026Review
- The past, present, and future of endoscopic management for biliary strictures: technological innovations and stent advancements.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- A review on biodegradable biliary stents: materials and future trends.Bioactive materials · 2022Review
- Review
- Applying Principles of Regenerative Medicine to Vascular Stent Development.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endovascular treatment is prevalent as a primary treatment for coronary and peripheral arterial diseases. Although the introduction of drug-eluting stents (DES) dramatically reduced the risk of in-stent restenosis, stent thrombosis persists as an issue. Notwithstanding improvements in newer generation DES, they are yet to address the urgent clinical need to abolish the late stent complications that result from in-stent restenosis and are associated with late thrombus formation. These often lead to acute coronary syndromes with high mortality in coronary artery disease and acute limb ischemia with a high risk of limb amputation in peripheral arterial disease. Recently, a significant amount of research has focused on alternative solutions to improve stent biocompatibility by using tissue engineering. There are two types of tissue engineering endothelialisation methods: in vitro and in vivo. To date, commercially available in vivo endothelialised stents have failed to demonstrate antithrombotic or anti-stenosis efficacy in clinical trials. In contrast, the in vitro endothelialisation methods exhibit the advantage of monitoring cell type and growth prior to implantation, enabling better quality control. The present review discusses tissue-engineered candidate stents constructed by distinct in vitro endothelialisation approaches, with a particular focus on fabrication processes, including cell source selection, stent material composition, stent surface modifications, efficacy and safety evidence from in vitro and in vivo studies, and future directions.
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.