Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 437

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Paclitaxel-Eluting versus Uncoated Stents in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Open access
Laarman, Gerrit J., Suttorp, Maarten J., Dirksen, Maurits T., van Heerebeek, Loek, Kiemeneij, Ferdinand, Slagboom, Ton, van der Wieken, L. Ron, Tijssen, Jan G.P., Rensing, Benno J., Patterson, Mark·2006·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting coronary-artery stents have been shown to decrease restenosis and therefore the likelihood that additional procedures will be required after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We evaluated the use of a drug-eluting stent in patients undergoing PCI for acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation. METHODS: We randomly assigned 619 patients presenting with an acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation to receive either a paclitaxel-eluting stent or an uncoated stent. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiac causes, recurrent myocardial infarction, or target-lesion revascularization at 1 year. RESULTS: Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics in both groups were well matched. There was a trend toward a lower rate of serious adverse events in the paclitaxel-stent group than in the uncoated-stent group (8.8% vs. 12.8%; adjusted relative risk, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.37 to 1.07; P=0.09). A nonsignificant trend was also detected in favor of the paclitaxel-stent group, as compared with the uncoated-stent group, in the rate of death from cardiac causes or recurrent myocardial infarction (5.5% vs. 7.2%, P=0.40) and in the rate of target-lesion revascularization (5.3% vs. 7.8%, P=0.23). The incidence of stent thrombosis during 1 year of follow-up was the same in both groups (1.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Although the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents in acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation reduced the incidence of serious adverse cardiac events at 1 year by 4.0 percentage points, as compared with uncoated stents, the difference was not statistically significant. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN65027270 [controlled-trials.com].).

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa062598

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Metadata

Authors
Laarman, G. J., Suttorp, M. J., Dirksen, M. T., van Heerebeek, L., Kiemeneij, F., Slagboom, T., van der Wieken, L. R., Tijssen, J. G. P., Rensing, B. J., & Patterson, M.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2006-09-14
Volume
355
Issue
11
Pages
1105-1113
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2074525536
Cited by
437
References
0
FWCI
71.38
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

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.