ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2024
Tandem lesions associate with angiographic progression of coronary artery stenoses.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2024. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although the clinical factors associated with progression of coronary artery disease have been well studied, the angiographic predictors are less defined. Objectives: Our objective was to study the clinical and angiographic factors that associate with progression of coronary artery stenoses. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing multiple, clinically indicated invasive coronary angiograms with an interval greater than 6 months, between January 2013 and December 2016. Lesion segments were analysed using Quantitative Coronary Angiography (QCA) if a stenosis ≥ 20 % was identified on either angiogram. Stenosis progression was defined as an increase ≥ 10 % in stenosis severity, with progressor groups analysed on both patient and lesion levels. Mixed-effects regression analyses were performed to evaluate factors associated with progression of individual stenoses. Results: 199 patients were included with 881 lesions analysed. 108 (54.3 %) patients and 186 (21.1 %) stenoses were classified as progressors. The median age was 65 years (IQR 56-73) and the median interval between angiograms was 2.1 years (IQR 1.2-3.0). On a patient level, age, number of lesions and presence of multivessel disease at baseline were each associated with progressor status. On a lesion level, presence of a stenosis downstream (OR 3.07, 95 % CI 2.04-4.63, Conclusion: Coronary lesions which have a downstream stenosis may be at increased risk of stenosis progression. Further research into the mechanistic basis of this finding is required, along with its implications for plaque vulnerability and clinical outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.