ArticleEJVES vascular forum2024
Assessment of Bridging Stents in In Situ Laser Fenestrations of Aortic Endografts With Intravascular Ultrasound.
Article in EJVES vascular forum, 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.
- Analysis of cutting ballon versus plain balloon dilatation after electrified wire in situ fenestration.JVS-vascular science · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Treatment of complex aortic aneurysms with the Methods: A commercially available aortic endograft was used to test the laser fenestration technique (Zenith Alpha, Cook Medical LLC, Bloomington, IN, USA). The ISLF was stented with the following bSGs: two Gore Viabahn VBX balloon expandable endoprostheses (WL Gore & Associates, Bloomington, IL, USA), three BeGraft Peripheral and three BeGraft Plus (Bentley InnoMed GmbH; Hechingen, Germany), and three Advanta V12 (Atrium, Hudson, NH, USA). The bSGs were expanded in three steps: (1) nominal, (2) rated burst pressure, and (3) dilation with a non-compliant balloon at 15 atmospheres. After each step, an IVUS assessment of the bSG minimum diameter and the area at the fenestration (FA) and in a fully expanded segment distal to the fenestration (SA) was performed. A mean of the three IVUS measurements was used as the value for comparison. An insufficient bSG expansion was defined as a mean of FA/SA of <0.8 (i.e., <80% expansion). Results: The VBX was the only bSG that could be expanded to its intended diameter (i.e., at least 80%) at nominal pressure. The BeGraft Peripheral and BeGraft Plus had the lowest degree of expansion after nominal and rated burst pressure. All bSGs that were tested reached a sufficient expansion degree after using a higher pressure balloon. Conclusion: In this
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.