Trial reportClinical cardiology2024
Safety and Efficacy of Two Ultrathin Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Real-World Practice: Genoss DES Stents Versus Orsiro Stents From a Prospective Registry.
Trial report in Clinical cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02038127 (Prospective Registry for Patients Undergoing Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Gangwon Province), which is not on this 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.
Prospective Registry for Patients Undergoing Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Gangwon Province
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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Orsiro and Genoss DES stents are biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (DESs) with ultrathin struts.
objectiveTo investigate the safety and efficacy of these two ultrathin DESs in real-world practice.
methodsFrom a single-center prospective registry, we included 751 and 931 patients treated with the Genoss DES and Orsiro stents, respectively. After propensity score matching, we compared 483 patients in each group with respect to a device-oriented composite outcome (DOCO), which comprised cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization up to 2 follow-up years.
resultsAfter propensity score matching, there were no significant between-group differences in clinical and angiographic characteristics. During the median follow-up period of 730 days (interquartile range, 427-730 days), there was no significant between-group difference in the DOCO rate (3.1% in the Genoss DES group vs. 2.9% in the Orsiro group, log-rank p = 0.847).
conclusionsThis study demonstrated comparable safety and efficacy between the Orsiro and Genoss DES stents during a 2-year follow-up period in real-world practice. However, this result should be confirmed in a large randomized controlled trial.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02038127.
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.