ReviewHeart international2021
A Narrative Review of Ultrathin-strut Drug-eluting Stents: The Thinner the Better?
Review in Heart international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention strategies for coronary small-vessel disease: a network meta-analysis of randomized trials.Annals of medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Risk factor analysis and machine learning-based prediction model for type 4b acute myocardial infarction induced by very late stent thrombosis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Bioresorbable Vascular Stents: How Neutrophil Extracellular Traps Influence Biocompatibility, Degradation Kinetics, and Device Performance.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Glue-Related Left Main Coronary Stenosis After a Modified Bentall Procedure: IVUS-Guided PCI.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- Additive Manufacturing of Polymeric Bioresorbable Stents: A Mechanical Performance Perspective.Biomaterials research · 2026Review
- Safety and efficacy of Evermine50 Everolimus-eluting coronary stent system in patients with native coronary artery lesions: Three-year outcomes from a single-center.Journal of cardiovascular and thoracic research · 2025Article
- Long-term outcomes following ultrathin vs thin-strut drug-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary intervention: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials.American journal of cardiovascular disease · 2024Review
- Review
- Stent Thrombosis and Restenosis with Contemporary Drug-Eluting Stents: Predictors and Current Evidence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Ultra-thin everolimus-eluting stents in atherosclerotic lesions: Three years follow-up with subgroup analysis of ultra-long stents.Indian heart journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are considered standard of care for revascularization of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Besides the polymer and antiproliferative drug used, the metallic backbone of DES is an attractive target for further development. Ultrathin-strut DES (≤70 μm strut thickness) are more flexible, have an improved trackability and crossability compared to conventional second-generation DES. Importantly, ultrathin-strut DES reduce the risk of in-stent restenosis, thereby decreasing the risk of angiographic and clinical restenosis. In this narrative review, we will discuss the clinical outcomes of the commercially available ultrathin-strut DES.
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.