ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2024
In-Stent Restenosis Overview: From Intravascular Imaging to Optimal Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Management.
Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of IVUS Guidance on Clinical and Procedural Outcomes in Intracoronary Brachytherapy.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Excimer Laser Coronary Atherectomy: Current Evidence, Clinical Applications, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Whole Blood Viscosity to Predict Stent Restenosis in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2025Article
- Intravascular ultrasound assessment of stent edge restenosis mechanisms and treatment outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Patient-specific coronary angioplasty simulations - A mixed-dimensional finite element modeling approach.Computers in biology and medicine · 2025Article
- Elevated Lipoprotein(a) Predicts Stent Edge Restenosis and Adverse Two-Year Outcomes After PCI: An Intravascular Ultrasound Study.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Relationship Between Serum HMGB1 and RAGE Levels and Restenosis in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients Complicated With Lower Extremity Vascular Disease: A Retrospective Study.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2025Article
- Research progress on risk factors for in-stent restenosis following cerebrovascular stent implantation.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Predictive value of combined MHR and Lp(a) for in-stent restenosis in coronary heart disease patients: a study based on GEE model.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- In-Stent Restenosis in Peripheral Arterial Disease: Ultra-High-Resolution Photon-Counting Versus Third-Generation Dual-Source Energy-Integrating Detector CT Phantom Study in Seven Different Stent Types.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite ongoing progress in stent technology and deployment techniques, in-stent restenosis (ISR) still remains a major issue following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and accounts for 10.6% of all interventions in the United States. With the continuous rise in ISR risk factors such as obesity and diabetes, along with an increase in the treatment of complex lesions with high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (CHIP), a substantial growth in ISR burden is expected. This review aims to provide insight into the mechanisms, classification, and management of ISR, with a focus on exploring innovative approaches to tackle this complication comprehensively, along with a special section addressing the approach to complex calcified lesions.
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.