ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
Drug-Coated Balloons and Bioresorbable Scaffolds in Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissections.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is an increasingly recognized cause of acute coronary syndromes in younger women without typical atherosclerotic risk factors. Its distinct pathophysiology and vessel fragility create unique challenges for revascularization. Conservative management is preferred when hemodynamics and coronary flow permit, but selected cases necessitate intervention, primarily percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Despite growing insights into SCAD pathomechanics-the "outside-in" and "inside-out" hypotheses-and the central role of intracoronary imaging (OCT/IVUS), optimal device strategies remain under-researched. The present review covers contemporary SCAD-PCI pitfalls and limitations, expanding to the mechanistic underpinnings and procedural applications of drug-coated balloons (DCB) and bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) as "leave-nothing-behind" alternatives. Both approaches have advantages and drawbacks but are attractive in selected scenarios: DCB delivers antiproliferative therapy without permanent caging, and BRS provides temporary scaffolding (amenable to overlap when required) with the potential to restore biomechanics/vasomotion after resorption. Acknowledging that definitive evidence is lacking and current data are largely observational, the review finally sets future research priorities including head-to-head trials of different DCB types and evaluation of next-generation, thinner-strut, predictably resorbing BRS. The overarching question is whether-and how-these modalities can be integrated into standardized, imaging-guided interventional algorithms for SCAD.
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.