ArticleAsiaIntervention2018
Long-term clinical outcomes with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents.
Article in AsiaIntervention, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is a biodegradable polymer stent really superior to a durable polymer stent?AsiaIntervention · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of a biodegradable polymer, sirolimus-eluting stent (Orsiro) with a durable polymer, sirolimus-eluting stent (CYPHER) to determine if late failure of the CYPHER is caused by the polymer or sirolimus. Methods and results: A total of 447 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with one of the study stents were retrospectively analysed. The composite of cardiac death, stent thrombosis, and clinically driven target lesion revascularisation (TLR) within two years after PCI occurred in 3.0% of the Orsiro group and 9.6% of the CYPHER group. Multivariable Cox regression results indicated that the Orsiro stent was a significant independent predictor of a lower occurrence of the composite outcome (adjusted HR 0.37, 95% CI: 0.14-0.87), stent thrombosis (adjusted HR 0.07, 95% CI: 0.00-0.65), clinically driven TLR (adjusted HR 0.26, 95% CI: 0.09-0.69), and stent failure (adjusted HR 0.26, 95% CI: 0.09-0.69) within two years after PCI. Conclusions: This study has demonstrated that late CYPHER failure is attributable more to its durable polymer than to the antiproliferative drug, sirolimus. This suggests that sirolimus-based, new-generation drug-eluting stents are relatively safe and are expected to show long-term outcomes superior to those of the CYPHER.
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.