ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Mid-Term Clinical Outcomes Following Drug-Coated Balloons in Coronary Artery Disease.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- High Non-Cardiac Death Incidence Should Be a Limitation of Drug-Eluting Stents Implantation? Insights from Recent Randomized Data.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Magnetoresponsive Functionalized Nanocomposite Aggregation Kinetics and Chain Formation at the Targeted Site during Magnetic Targeting.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
- Utilization of Drug-Coated Balloons for the Treatment of Coronary Lesions in the Elderly Population.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the mid-term efficacy of drug-coated balloons (DCB) in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in two different pathophysiologic scenarios.
backgroundThere are different underlying pathological processes in coronary artery disease. Mid-term safety and efficacy of DCB approach is still limited.
methodsMedical records of all consecutive patients undergoing DCB were evaluated. The primary endpoint was the rate of clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) after 24 months.
resultsBetween January 2011 and December 2017, 442 patients were included, representing 4.4% of all PCIs in our institution. A total of 460 DCB lesions were treated, of which 328 (71.3%) were de novo and 132 (28.7%) were combined bare metal or drug-eluting stents with in-stent restenosis (ISR). The patients' mean age was 66.2 ± 11.7 years with a diabetes prevalence of 45.3%. The TLR rate was lower in the de novo group (5.3%) compared to the ISR group (9.4%) (
conclusionOur extended experience demonstrates that the mid-term DCB approach in these two pathophysiologic settings represent a reasonable option, with low TLR rate.
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.