FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1914727905> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1914727905 endingPage "h5392" @default.
• W1914727905 startingPage "h5392" @default.
• W1914727905 abstract "What is the most safe and effective interventional treatment for coronary in-stent restenosis?In a hierarchical Bayesian network meta-analysis, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and major scientific websites were screened up to 10 August 2015. Randomised controlled trials of patients with any type of coronary in-stent restenosis (either of bare metal stents or drug eluting stents; and either first or recurrent instances) were included. Trials including multiple treatments at the same time in the same group or comparing variants of the same intervention were excluded. Primary endpoints were target lesion revascularisation and late lumen loss, both at six to 12 months. The main analysis was complemented by network subanalyses, standard pairwise comparisons, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses.Twenty four trials (4880 patients), including seven interventional treatments, were identified. Compared with plain balloons, bare metal stents, brachytherapy, rotational atherectomy, and cutting balloons, drug coated balloons and drug eluting stents were associated with a reduced risk of target lesion revascularisation and major adverse cardiac events, and with reduced late lumen loss. Treatment ranking indicated that drug eluting stents had the highest probability (61.4%) of being the most effective for target lesion vascularisation; drug coated balloons were similarly indicated as the most effective treatment for late lumen loss (probability 70.3%). The comparative efficacy of drug coated balloons and drug eluting stents was similar for target lesion revascularisation (summary odds ratio 1.10, 95% credible interval 0.59 to 2.01) and late lumen loss reduction (mean difference in minimum lumen diameter 0.04 mm, 95% credible interval -0.20 to 0.10). Risks of death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis were comparable across all treatments, but these analyses were limited by a low number of events. Trials had heterogeneity regarding investigation periods, baseline characteristics, and endpoint reporting, with a lack of information at long term follow-up. Direct and indirect evidence was also inconsistent for the comparison between drug eluting stents and drug coated balloons.Compared with other currently available interventional treatments for coronary in-stent restenosis, drug coated balloons and drug eluting stents are associated with superior clinical and angiographic outcomes, with a similar comparative efficacy.This study received no external funding. The authors declare no competing interests. No additional data available." @default.
• W1914727905 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1914727905 creator A5000659710 @default.
• W1914727905 creator A5019323604 @default.
• W1914727905 creator A5045169227 @default.
• W1914727905 creator A5057508716 @default.
• W1914727905 creator A5068482307 @default.
• W1914727905 creator A5087550320 @default.
• W1914727905 date "2015-11-04" @default.
• W1914727905 modified "2023-10-12" @default.
• W1914727905 title "Treatment strategies for coronary in-stent restenosis: systematic review and hierarchical Bayesian network meta-analysis of 24 randomised trials and 4880 patients" @default.
• W1914727905 cites W1617328014 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W176420385 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W1837016141 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W1987448816 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2001583393 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2005656672 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2006539623 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2010699829 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2012105182 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2024737544 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2026168678 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2031977914 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2032903984 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2033597668 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2036208240 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2043116610 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2058692470 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2065398346 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2066654892 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2072289636 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2074705240 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2076552301 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2087150869 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2091808438 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2098160125 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2105669432 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2107328434 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2107394367 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2109769695 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2111592624 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2113144077 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2115824015 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2125435699 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2130294350 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2134852288 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2144625636 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2150529573 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2156098321 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2157018249 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2157823046 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2161511827 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2165754633 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2165993944 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2168008786 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2168331993 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2168718800 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2169272176 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2171438563 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2318953306 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2897247590 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W2991792334 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W3012564647 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W41821263 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W4236531408 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W73083764 @default.
• W1914727905 cites W85010934 @default.
• W1914727905 doi "https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h5392" @default.
• W1914727905 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/4632210" @default.
• W1914727905 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26537292" @default.
• W1914727905 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W1914727905 type Work @default.
• W1914727905 sameAs 1914727905 @default.
• W1914727905 citedByCount "95" @default.
• W1914727905 countsByYear W19147279052015 @default.
• W1914727905 countsByYear W19147279052016 @default.
• W1914727905 countsByYear W19147279052017 @default.
• W1914727905 countsByYear W19147279052018 @default.
• W1914727905 countsByYear W19147279052019 @default.
• W1914727905 countsByYear W19147279052020 @default.
• W1914727905 countsByYear W19147279052021 @default.
• W1914727905 countsByYear W19147279052022 @default.
• W1914727905 countsByYear W19147279052023 @default.
• W1914727905 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1914727905 hasAuthorship W1914727905A5000659710 @default.
• W1914727905 hasAuthorship W1914727905A5019323604 @default.
• W1914727905 hasAuthorship W1914727905A5045169227 @default.
• W1914727905 hasAuthorship W1914727905A5057508716 @default.
• W1914727905 hasAuthorship W1914727905A5068482307 @default.
• W1914727905 hasAuthorship W1914727905A5087550320 @default.
• W1914727905 hasBestOaLocation W19147279051 @default.
• W1914727905 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W1914727905 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W1914727905 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W1914727905 hasConcept C156957248 @default.
• W1914727905 hasConcept C2776478404 @default.
• W1914727905 hasConcept C2777546689 @default.
• W1914727905 hasConcept C2778283817 @default.

• next