ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2021
Procedural Results and Long-Term Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for in-Stent Restenosis Chronic Total Occlusion Compared with de novo Chronic Total Occlusion.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for In-Stent Restenosis Versus De Novo Lesions: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes for in-Stent vs de Novo Chronic Total Occlusions: A Meta-Analysis.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2026Review
- Retrospective analysis of the drug-coated balloon-only strategy for chronic total occlusion coronary lesions.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn-stent restenosis (ISR) chronic total occlusion (CTO) represents a challenging subgroup for revascularization of CTO by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There are limited data on the treatment and outcomes of PCI for ISR CTO.
objectiveWe aimed to evaluate the procedural results and 2-year outcomes of PCI for ISR CTO compared with de novo CTO.
methodsPatients undergoing attempted CTO PCI between January 2017 and December 2019 were prospectively enrolled. We analyzed the procedural results and 2-year major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients undergoing ISR CTO and those undergoing de novo CTO PCI.
resultsA total of 426 patients undergoing 484 consecutive CTO PCI (ISR CTO PCI, n=84; de novo CTO, n=400) were enrolled during the study period. Patients undergoing de novo CTO PCI had a significantly greater syntax score than those undergoing ISR CTO PCI [23.0 (17.5, 30.5) vs 21.5 (14.5, 27.0),
conclusionISR CTO PCI shows comparable technical and procedural success, as well as major procedural complications compared with de novo CTO PCI. However, patients who underwent ISR CTO PCI had a significantly worse prognosis than those who underwent de novo CTO PCI, in terms of MACE, driven by TVR. ISR CTO was the only independent predictor of MACE during the follow-up.
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.