ArticleTurk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi2024
The effectiveness of the flip technique in vertical ductal stenting.
Article in Turk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In this study, the flip technique was compared with the classical method in terms of procedural success and procedure time during ductal stent implantation (DSI) via the carotid artery in patients whose pulmonary blood flow is dependent on the vertical type of ductus arteriosus (DA). Methods: Between January 2019 and June 2023, 40 patients (24 males, 16 females; mean age: 15.9±15.4 days; range, 1 to 68 days) with vertical ductus-dependent pulmonary circulation who underwent patent DA stent implantation via the carotid artery were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent the flip technique (Group 1) and those who did not undergo the flip technique (Group 2). Data were retospectively compiled by reviewing patient files and catheter images. Results: Demographic findings were similar in the groups. The distribution of the DA in terms of tortuosity index was also similar in the groups. The procedure was successful in 18 (90%) patients in Group 1 and 20 (100%) patients in Group 2. There was no procedure-related mortality in both groups. The frequency of procedure-related complications was similar. Procedure duration was 53.6±18.4 min in Group 1 and 41.5±9.1 min in Group 2; the difference was significantly lower in Group 2 (p=0.028). The shorter follow-up in Group 2 was attributed to the flip method starting to be used later in the clinic. During follow-up, stent dilatation was required in two patients in Group 1 and one patient in Group 2, and a second stent implantation was needed in one patient in Group 2. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of reintervention. Conclusion: The success rate of DSI using the carotid artery access is high with both the classical and the flip method in patients with vertical DA. However, the use of the flip technique could be preferred in terms of operator habituation, ergonomic use of the catheter, guidewires, and shorter procedure time.
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.