Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 311

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impact of Completeness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Revascularization on Long-Term Outcomes in the Stent Era

Hannan, Edward L., Racz, Michael, Holmes, David R., King, Spencer B., Walford, Gary, Ambrose, John A., Sharma, Samin, Katz, Stanley, Clark, Luther T., Jones, Robert H.·2006·Circulation

Abstract

Background— The importance of completeness of revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease is unclear in that there is little information on the impact of incomplete revascularization outside of randomized trials. The objective of this study is to compare long-term mortality and subsequent revascularization for percutaneous coronary intervention patients receiving stents who were completely revascularized (CR) with those who were incompletely revascularized (IR). Methods and Results— Patients from New York State’s Percutaneous Coronary Interventions Reporting System were subdivided into patients who were CR and IR. Then subsets of IR patients were contrasted with CR patients. Differences in long-term survival and subsequent revascularization for CR and IR patients were compared after adjustment for differences in preprocedural risk. A total of 68.9% of all stent patients with multivessel disease who were studied were IR, and 30.1% of all patients had total occlusions and/or ≥2 IR vessels. At baseline, the following patients were at higher risk: those who were older and those with more comorbid conditions, worse ejection fraction, and more renal disease and stroke. After adjustment for these baseline differences, IR patients were significantly more likely to die at any time (adjusted hazard ratio=1.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.30) than CR patients. IR patients with total occlusions and a total of ≥2 IR vessels were at the highest risk compared with CR patients (hazard ratio=1.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 1.66). Conclusions— IR with stenting is associated with an adverse impact on long-term mortality, and consideration should be given to either achieving CR, opting for surgery, or monitoring percutaneous coronary intervention patients with IR more closely after discharge.

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 · 10.1161/circulationaha.106.612267

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 17 references

Cited by

See all 311

Metadata

Authors
Hannan, E. L., Racz, M., Holmes, D. R., King, S. B., Walford, G., Ambrose, J. A., Sharma, S., Katz, S., Clark, L. T., & Jones, R. H.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2006-05-23
Volume
113
Issue
20
Pages
2406-2412
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2096498235
Cited by
311
References
17
FWCI
21.51
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: Impact of Completeness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Revascularization on Long-Term Outcomes in the Stent Era. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.106.612267
The paper
Hannan, E. L., Racz, M., Holmes, D. R., King, S. B., Walford, G., Ambrose, J. A., Sharma, S., Katz, S., Clark, L. T., & Jones, R. H. (2006). Impact of Completeness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Revascularization on Long-Term Outcomes in the Stent Era. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.106.612267

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.