ArticleClinical case reports2024
The unpredictable resorption of bioresorbable scaffolds-A tale of two ABSORBs.
Article in Clinical case reports, 2024. 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.
- The unpredictable resorption of bioresorbable scaffolds-A tale of two ABSORBs.Clinical case reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bioresorbable stents represent a revolutionary treatment for coronary artery disease. Such a device offers the prospect for complete naturalization of artery lumen after strut resorption and restoration of vasomotion while curtailing the duration of dual anti-platelet therapy. The prototype bioresorbable scaffold (BRS-ABSORB GT1) demonstrated good feasibility and safety in the initial studies compared to metallic drug eluting stent but later fell out of favor due to multiple report of stent thrombosis and target lesion failure. Unpredictable resorption of struts turned out to be one of the "Achilles heel" of the BRS and stent strut were still visible in vessel on optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 3 years. We report a case of differential resorption of two ABSORB BRS implanted simultaneously in the same patient by the same operator. Follow up coronary angiogram revealed only minimal plaques on right coronary artery (RCA) and left anterior descending artery (LAD). The BRS were identified on cine-angiogram by their radio-opaque markers at both ends. The OCT run in LAD artery revealed "ghost remnants" of BRS struts in LAD, whereas the RCA BRS had completely healed with minimal "ghost" struts. The ghost remnants of BRS resembled the original "Check box" appearance on OCT during the index implantation.
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.