ArticleHeart and vessels2025
Effectiveness of the repeated 3-time-balloon-inflation method in reducing coronary stent edge dissection.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2025. 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.
- Intravascular ultrasound evaluation of novel non-compliant versus conventional semi-compliant cutting balloon for calcified coronary lesions.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Observational
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
The optimal procedural protocol for coronary stent deployment remains undetermined. Post-dilation with a high-pressure balloon is often performed to optimize the stent expansion. However, high-pressure dilation also carries the potential risk of coronary artery injury. A previous in vitro study reported that multiple-times balloon inflation at the same pressure resulted in better stent expansion compared to one-time balloon inflation. In our facility, we frequently perform the repeated 3-time-balloon-inflation method, wherein the stent delivery balloon was inflated 3 times at nominal pressure to deploy the stent, to improve stent expansion without high-pressure balloon inflation. Although this method seems effective in avoiding excessive high-pressure dilation, its clinical data are insufficient. In this study, we investigated the clinical outcomes of the repeated 3-time-balloon-inflation method. This retrospective study included 370 patients with 467 stented coronary lesions. These subjects were divided into two groups: one with standard balloon inflation and the other with repeated 3-time balloon inflation, and treatment outcomes were compared. The repeated 3-time-balloon-inflation group had 254 lesions, and the standard-balloon-inflation group had 213 lesions. Stent edge dissection occurred in 6 lesions (2.8%) in the standard-balloon-inflation group, whereas did not occur in the repeated 3-time-balloon-inflation group. A statistically significant difference remained even after propensity score matching (p = 0.040). The final minimum stent area and long-term clinical outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups. The repeated 3-time-balloon-inflation method may reduce stent edge dissection while demonstrating comparable minimal stent area and long-term outcomes to the standard-balloon-inflation method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39718636What 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.