ArticleReviews in cardiovascular medicine2022
Simple Stenting Strategy with or without Branch Ostial Optimization Technique for Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions.
Article in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. 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.
- Review of Techniques for Protecting Side Branch from Occlusion during Provisional Stenting in Coronary Bifurcation Lesions.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A simple stenting strategy with provisional side-branch (SB) stenting or crossover stenting has been recommended as the default approach for most coronary bifurcation lesions (CBLs). The proximal optimization technique (POT) and POT-associated techniques (POTAs) were introduced to optimize the ostium of SB. However, these techniques are unable to remove the jailed struts or completely diminish vessel damage. In this study we developed a novel branch ostial optimization technique (BOOT) and assessed its efficacy and safety by a propensity score matching comparison (PSM) with POT-associated techniques (POTA). Methods: From June 2016 to March 2018, a total of 203 consecutive patients with true CBLs were treated with BOOT (50 patients) or POTA stenting (153 patients). We performed PSM to correct for confounders from clinical and lesion characteristics. The primary endpoint was cumulative major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 12 months including cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel/lesion revascularization (TVR/TLR) or target vessel/lesion thrombosis (ST). Results: After PSM, there were 43 patients in each group. Follow-up coronary angiography was performed in 77 (89.5%) patients. At 12 months, the angiographic restenosis rate was significantly different between the BOOT group and the POTA group after PSM (proximal main branch: 20.01 Conclusions: In patients with CBLs, BOOT is feasible for optimization of the SB ostium and may be superior to POTAs in terms of the angiographic measurements and long-term clinical outcomes at 12 months follow-up.
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.