ArticleClinical cardiology2025
Underestimation of Stent Efficacy: Untreated Artery Events Distort Coronary Intervention Outcomes.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 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.
- Underestimation of Stent Efficacy: Untreated Artery Events Distort Coronary Intervention Outcomes.Clinical cardiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvaluation of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) effectiveness typically focuses on overall coronary events, often overlooking the specific location of these events within the coronary vasculature. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of coronary events in patients treated with PCI and to investigate the correlation between these events, the location of the event within the treated site, and the type of stent used.
methodsThis study determined the proportion of coronary events occurring after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and investigated the association between these events and the location of the previous treatment site. A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent PCI using either conventional or drug-eluting stents. Data was obtained from the MASS Clinical Research Unit database. The location of the coronary event was determined by angiography.
resultsFive hundred and sixty two patients were included, with 232 (41.3%) experiencing coronary events. 55.8% of the events occurred at the treated site, while the remaining 44.2% were unrelated to the treated site. Of the events related to the treated site, 54.1% occurred in the conventional stent group and 61.1% in the drug-eluting stent group. No statistically significant association was found between the event in the treated site and the type of stent used (p = 0.363).
conclusionsA significant proportion of coronary events occurred in untreated sites. Our results suggest that isolated evaluation of the treated site may provide a more accurate estimate of the effectiveness of stents.
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.