Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,441

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Stent Thrombosis in Randomized Clinical Trials of Drug-Eluting Stents

Mauri, Laura, Hsieh, Wen-hua, Massaro, Joseph M., Ho, Kalon K.L., D'Agostino, Ralph, Cutlip, Donald E.·2007·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Definitions of stent thrombosis that have been used in clinical trials of drug-eluting stents have been restrictive and have not been used in a uniform manner. METHODS: We applied a hierarchical classification of stent thrombosis set by the Academic Research Consortium (ARC) across randomized trials involving 878 patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents, 1400 treated with paclitaxel-eluting stents, and 2267 treated with bare-metal stents. We then pooled 4 years of follow-up data. All events were adjudicated by an independent clinical-events committee. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of stent thrombosis according to the original protocol definitions was 1.2% in the sirolimus-stent group versus 0.6% in the bare-metal-stent group (P=0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.4 to 1.5) and 1.3% in the paclitaxel-stent group versus 0.8% in the bare-metal-stent group (P=0.24; 95% CI, -0.3 to 1.4). The incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis as defined by the ARC was 1.5% in the sirolimus-stent group versus 1.7% in the bare-metal-stent group (P=0.70; 95% CI, -1.5 to 1.0) and 1.8% in the paclitaxel-stent group versus 1.4% in the bare-metal-stent group (P=0.52; 95% CI, -0.7 to 1.4). The incidence of definite or probable events occurring 1 to 4 years after implantation was 0.9% in the sirolimus-stent group versus 0.4% in the bare-metal-stent group and 0.9% in the paclitaxel-stent group versus 0.6% in the bare-metal-stent group. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of stent thrombosis did not differ significantly between patients with drug-eluting stents and those with bare-metal stents in randomized clinical trials, although the power to detect small differences in rates was limited.

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/nejmoa067731

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

See all 1,441

Metadata

Authors
Mauri, L., Hsieh, W.-H., Massaro, J. M., Ho, K. K. L., D'Agostino, R., & Cutlip, D. E.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2007-03-08
Volume
356
Issue
10
Pages
1020-1029
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2049120615
Cited by
1,441
References
0
FWCI
174.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Stent Thrombosis in Randomized Clinical Trials of Drug-Eluting Stents. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa067731
The paper
Mauri, L., Hsieh, W.-H., Massaro, J. M., Ho, K. K. L., D'Agostino, R., & Cutlip, D. E. (2007). Stent Thrombosis in Randomized Clinical Trials of Drug-Eluting Stents. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa067731

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.