Observational studyClinical cardiology2024
Real-World Clinical Performance of a Novolimus-Eluting Stent Versus a Sirolimus-Eluting Stent.
Observational study in Clinical cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Site-Specific Antithrombotic Therapy: 24-Month Outcomes of the Randomized DESyne BDS Plus Trial Using a Novel Triple-Drug Eluting Coronary Implant With Two Anticoagulants and Sirolimus.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025Trial
- Systematic Pharmacology Combined With Experimental Validation Reveals the Apoptosis-Related Mechanism of Simiao Yong'an (SMYA) Decoction Against Myocardial Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe DESyne novolimus-eluting coronary stent (NES) is a new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) that is widely used, but clinical data are rarely reported for this stent. We compared the safety and effectiveness of the DESyne NES and the Orsiro bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
methodsThis was a retrospective, single-center, observational study. Between July 2017 and December 2022, patients who presented with chronic or acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI with DESyne NES or Orsiro SES were consecutively enrolled in the present study. The primary endpoint, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), was a composite of cardiovascular death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target-lesion revascularization.
resultsA total of 776 patients (age 68.8 ± 12.2; 75.9% male) undergoing PCI were included. Overall, 231 patients with 313 lesions received NES and 545 patients with 846 lesions received SES. During a follow-up duration of 784 ± 522 days, the primary endpoint occurred in 10 patients (4.3%) in the NES group and in 36 patients (6.6%) in the SES group. After multivariate adjustment, the risk of MACE did not significantly differ between groups (NES vs. SES, hazard ratio 0.74, 95% CI, 0.35-1.55, p = 0.425). The event rate of individual components of the primary endpoint was comparable between the two groups.
conclusionsFavorable and similar clinical outcomes were observed in patients undergoing PCI with either NES or SES in a medium-term follow-up duration. Future studies with adequately powered clinical endpoints are required for further evaluation.
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.