ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2022
Inflammatory Phenotype by OCT Coronary Imaging: Specific Features Among De Novo Lesions, In-Stent Neointima, and In-Stent Neo-Atherosclerosis.
Article in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between uric acid to high-density cholesterol ratio (UHR) and in-stent neoatherosclerosis: an optical coherence tomography study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Article
- Neoatherosclerosis: A Distinctive Pathological Mechanism of Stent Failure.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Predictive values of novel high‑density lipoprotein‑related inflammatory indices in in‑stent restenosis among patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2024Article
- Influence of the Immune System on Cardiovascular Disease.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2023Article
- Macrophages and Neovascularization in In-Stent Neoatherosclerosis: An Accelerated Inflammatory Phenotype by OCT with Therapeutic Implications.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCoronary stenosis can be caused de novo atherosclerosis, in-stent restenosis, and in-stent neoatherosclerosis, three entities that develop from a diverse pathophysiological milieu.
objectiveThis study aims to investigate, using optical coherence tomography (OCT), whether or not coronary lesions related to these processes differ in their local inflammatory profile.
methodsRetrospective analysis of patients with diagnosed or suspected coronary lesions who had undergone OCT imaging for clinical reasons. Macrophage and intra-plaque neovascularization were assessed by OCT and used as surrogates of local inflammation. A significance level of < 0.05 was adopted as statistically significant.
resultsFrom the 121 lesions, 74 were de novo, 29 were restenosis, and 18 were neoatherosclerosis. Neovascularization was found in 65.8% of de novo, 10.3% in restenosis, and 94.4% in neoatherosclerosis (p<0.01 for all). The volume of neovascularization was different among lesion types (950 vs. 0 vs. 6220, respectively [median values in 1000 x µm3/mm]; p<0.01 for all), which were significantly higher in neoatherosclerosis and lower in restenosis. The presence of macrophages differed among the lesions (95.9% in de novo vs. 6.9% in restenosis vs. 100% in neoatherosclerosis [p<0.01 for all]). Moreover, the intensity of macrophagic infiltration was different among lesion types (2.5 vs. 0.0 vs. 4.5, respectively [median values of macrophage score]; p<0.01 for all), significantly higher in neoatheroscleosis and lower in restenosis.
conclusionWhen compared using coronary OCT, de novo atherosclerosis, in-stent restenosis, and neoatherosclerosis presented markedly different inflammatory phenotypes.
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.