ArticleJACC. Asia2025
Dynamic Changes of 3D Bending Angle Through the Cardiac Cycle: Implications With Bioresorbable Scaffold Performance.
Article in JACC. Asia, 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.
- 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
backgroundSeveral predictors of adverse events following bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have been identified. The role of vessel biomechanical properties remains underexplored.
objectivesThis study aimed to describe the biomechanical properties of coronary arteries after BRS implantation by assessing the maximum bending angle (BAmax) changes through the cardiac cycle and their interaction with long-term incidence of target-vessel failure (TVF).
methodsThree-dimensional BAmax was computed at end-diastole and end-systole, before and after BRS implantation. Cardiac motion-induced angulation change (ΔcBAmax) was calculated as the absolute difference between end-systole and end-diastole, and scaffold-induced angulation changes as the absolute difference between pre- and postimplantation.
resultsBAmax computation was available in 164 coronary vessels at baseline and in 88 at long-term follow-up (57 [42-66] months). Following BRS implantation, BAmax decreased both in diastole (-6.2°) and in systole (-9.0°). TVF-related vessels showed higher pre-PCI BAmax at end-diastole, at end-systole, and higher ΔcBAmax (11.4° [6.0°-22.9°] vs 5.8° [2.7°-12.4°]; P = 0.002), whereas no significant difference in post-PCI BAmax was present. Scaffold-induced BAmax change was significantly higher in vessels with TVF compared with TVF-free ones, both at end-diastole, end-systole, and in the ΔcBAmax group (10.1° [4.4°-20.6°] vs 5.7° [2.3°-10.9°]; P = 0.001). Multivariate analysis identified scaffold-induced change in ΔcBAmax as an independent predictor of TVF (for 10° increase: aHR 1.65; 95% CI: 1.11-2.45; P = 0.01). After BRS resorption, coronary artery BAmax increased, restoring baseline biomechanics.
conclusionsBA changes through the cardiac cycle decrease after PCI with BRS; the greater the decrease, the higher the risk of target vessel failure at follow-up.
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.