Observational studyBMC cardiovascular disorders2022
Optical coherence tomography: evaluating the effects of stent boost subtract imaging on stent underexpansion in STEMI patients.
Observational study in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2022. 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.
- Seeing the Unseen: Enhanced Stent Visualization Reveals Hidden Coronary Stent Complications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- A bibliometric and visualized analysis of interventional treatment for intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (from 2004 to 2023).Neurosurgical review · 2025Review
- Value of stent boost imaging in decision making after coronary stenting.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the effect of stent boost subtract (SBS) imaging on stent underexpansion during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) by optical coherence tomography (OCT).
methodsOne hundred thirty-eight STEMI patients who underwent drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation were prospectively recruited and divided into the SBS group (69 cases) and the CAG group (69 cases) according to whether SBS was used to guide PCI. Finally, OCT was performed on all enrolled patients, and the OCT results were used as the gold standard to evaluate the impact of standard SBS technology on stent underexpansion immediately after DES implantation.
resultsSBS identified 51 patients (24%) with stent underexpansion while OCT identified 56 patients (27.2%). SBS has a sensitivity of 80%, a specificity of 96%, a positive predictive value of 88%, and a negative predictive value of 93% for identifying stent underexpansion.
conclusionCompared with OCT, SBS technology is a rapid stent imaging evaluation method that can accurately quantify the stent expansion level and is time-saving and economical.
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.