Observational studyScientific reports2025
Safety and efficacy of super-high pressure OPN balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis - an intra-coronary imaging-based observational study.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 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.
- Novel Hertz Contact Intravascular Lithotripsy: Could We Achieve More in Balloon-Based Calcium Modification?Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
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
Patients with in-stent restenosis have an increased risk of recurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events. Achievement of an adequate acute luminal gain is essential to minimize such recurrence. We compared the effect of utilization of Super-high pressure OPN balloon in patients with In-stent restenosis. This is an investigator-initiated single-centre observational study done at SRIHER, India. The primary outcome was procedural success, defined by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). In addition, we intended to study the in-hospital clinical outcomes. We studied 30 patients, with 73.4% male and a median age of 66.5 years. Diabetes was present in 83%, hypertension in 60%, and chronic kidney disease in 20%. Left ventricular dysfunction (EF < 45%) was observed in 43.3%. In-stent restenosis (ISR) cases presented as chronic coronary syndrome (43.3%), NSTEMI (36.7%), and unstable angina (20%). Among 49 lesions, 48.97% were in the LAD, followed by the RCA (28.57%), LCx (20.4%), and LM (2.04%). OPN was used for pre-dilatation in 14 patients and post-dilatation in 13 patients while it was used for both pre- and post-dilatation in 3 patients. Regarding final treatment, drug-eluting stents (DES) was used in 21 cases (36 lesions), a covered stent in 1 case (2 lesions), drug-coated balloons (DCB) in 6 cases (9 lesions), and plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) in 2 cases (2 lesions). Procedural success was obtained in all but one patients. (n = 47 lesions) One patient had coronary perforation that was managed by a covered stent. At a median follow-up of 31 months (IQR-22), 4 (13.3%) patients had died; 1 due to potential stent thrombosis and 3 due to non-cardiovascular causes, and there was no MI or repeat revascularization. In our image-guided study, we found that OPN usage may be a safe and effective in patients with ISR lesions leading to a very good acute luminal gain.
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.