Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39076706›Full record

SynthesisReviews in cardiovascular medicine2023

Stepwise Provisional

Dongdong Li, Hao Liu, Chuncheng Gao, Jing Liu, Pengyun Liu, Miaomiao Cheng, Qiangsun Zheng, Jie Deng, Mingming Zhang, Zhonghua Luo and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Dongdong LiDepartment of Cardiology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University, 710038 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Hao LiuDepartment of Cardiology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University, 710038 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Chuncheng GaoDepartment of Cardiology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University, 710038 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Jing LiuDepartment of Cardiology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University, 710038 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Pengyun LiuDepartment of Cardiology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University, 710038 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Miaomiao ChengDepartment of Cardiology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University, 710038 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Qiangsun ZhengDepartment of Cardiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, 710004 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Jie DengDepartment of Cardiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, 710004 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Mingming ZhangDepartment of Cardiology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University, 710038 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Zhonghua LuoDepartment of Intervention Radiology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University, 710038 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Wangang GuoDepartment of Cardiology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University, 710038 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Provisional stenting is the preferred strategy for non-left main bifurcation lesions. However, its superiority over planned double stenting for unprotected left main distal bifurcation (UPLMB) lesions remains unclear. Previous studies have reported conflicting results. Methods: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the outcomes of provisional stenting to planned double stenting for UPLMB lesions were identified. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The secondary endpoints were myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularisation (TVR), target lesion revascularisation (TLR), all-cause death, cardiac death and stent thrombosis (ST). Aggregated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. A sensitivity analysis was conducted if Results: Two RCTs and 19 observational studies comprising 11,672 patients were enrolled. Provisional stenting had a significantly lower incidence of MACE, mainly driven by TLR and TVR. Double stenting had a significantly lower incidence of cardiac death. In addition, patients undergoing provisional stenting had a lower tendency towards the occurrence of MI, while patients undergoing double stenting had a lower tendency towards all-cause death and ST. Conclusions: A provisional stenting strategy was associated with lower MACE, TVR and TLR but higher cardiac death. Further investigation is needed through RCTs to assess which strategy performs better.

Indexed as

bifurcationdouble stentingleft mainMACEprovisional stenting

Identifiers

PMID39076706
PMCPMC11266839

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.