The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Sirolimus-Eluting versus Uncoated Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Sirolimus-eluting stents reduce rates of restenosis and reintervention, as compared with uncoated stents. Data are limited regarding the safety and efficacy of such stents in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation. METHODS: We performed a single-blind, multicenter, prospectively randomized trial to compare sirolimus-eluting stents with uncoated stents in primary PCI for acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation. The trial included 712 patients at 48 medical centers. The primary end point was target-vessel failure at 1 year after the procedure, defined as target-vessel-related death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or target-vessel revascularization. A follow-up angiographic substudy was performed at 8 months among 174 patients from selected centers. RESULTS: The rate of the primary end point was significantly lower in the sirolimus-stent group than in the uncoated-stent group (7.3% vs. 14.3%, P=0.004). This reduction was driven by a decrease in the rate of target-vessel revascularization (5.6% and 13.4%, respectively; P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of death (2.3% and 2.2%, respectively; P=1.00), reinfarction (1.1% and 1.4%, respectively; P=1.00), or stent thrombosis (3.4% and 3.6%, respectively; P=1.00). The degree of neointimal proliferation, as assessed by the mean (+/-SD) in-stent late luminal loss, was significantly lower in the sirolimus-stent group (0.14+/-0.49 mm, vs. 0.83+/-0.52 mm in the uncoated stent group; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among selected patients with acute myocardial infarction, the use of sirolimus-eluting stents significantly reduced the rate of target-vessel revascularization at 1 year. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00232830 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
JCS 2018 Guideline on Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome
Kimura, K., Kimura, T., Ishihara, M., Nakagawa, Y., Nakao, K., Miyauchi, K., Sakamoto, T., Tsujita, K., Hagiwara, N., Miyazaki, S., et al. (2019) · Circulation Journal · doi:10.1253/circj.cj-19-0133 · Cited by 565
Effectiveness and Safety of Drug-Eluting Stents in Ontario
Tu, J. V., Bowen, J., Chiu, M., Ko, D. T., Austin, P. C., He, Y., Hopkins, R., Tarride, J.-E., Blackhouse, G., Lazzam, C., et al. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa071076 · Cited by 383
New concepts in the design of drug-eluting coronary stents
Garg, S., Bourantas, C., & Serruys, P. W. (2013) · Nature Reviews Cardiology · doi:10.1038/nrcardio.2013.13 · Cited by 125
Metadata
- Authors
- Spaulding, C., Henry, P., Teiger, E., Beatt, K., Bramucci, E., Carrié, D., Slama, M. S., Merkely, B., Erglis, A., Margheri, M., Varenne, O., Cebrian, A., Stoll, H.-P., Snead, D. B., & Bode, C.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2006-09-14
- Volume
- 355
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1093-1104
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W1994460424
- Cited by
- 564
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 81.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sirolimus-Eluting versus Uncoated Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa062006
- The paper
- Spaulding, C., Henry, P., Teiger, E., Beatt, K., Bramucci, E., Carrié, D., Slama, M. S., Merkely, B., Erglis, A., Margheri, M., Varenne, O., Cebrian, A., Stoll, H.-P., Snead, D. B., & Bode, C. (2006). Sirolimus-Eluting versus Uncoated Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa062006
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.