The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Risk Stratification, Systematic Classification, and Anticipatory Management Strategies for Stent Fracture After Percutaneous Pulmonary Valve Implantation
Open accessAbstract
Background— We analyzed the incidence, risk factors and treatment options for stent fracture after percutaneous pulmonary valve (PPV) implantation (PPVI). Methods and Results— After PPVI, 123 patients had chest x-ray in anteroposterior and lateral projection, echocardiography, and clinical evaluation during structured follow-up. Of these 123 patients, 26 (21.1%) developed stent fracture 0 to 843 days after PPVI (stent fracture–free survival at 1 year, 85.1%; at 2 years, 74.5%; and at 3 years, 69.2%). Stent fracture was classified as type I: no loss of stent integrity (n=17); type II: loss of integrity with restenosis on echocardiography (n=8); and type III: separation of fragments or embolization (n=1). In a multivariate Cox regression, we analyzed various factors, of which 3 were associated with a higher risk of stent fracture: implantation into “native” right ventricular outflow tract ( P =0.04), no calcification along the right ventricular outflow tract (judged with fluoroscopy, P =0.02), recoil of PPV (qualitatively, PPV diameter in frontal or lateral plane with fully inflated balloon > diameter after balloon deflation, P =0.03). Substernal PPV location, high-pressure post-PPVI dilatation of PPV, pre-PPVI right ventricular outflow tract gradients, and other indicators of PPV compression or asymmetry did not pose increased risk. Patients with type I fracture remain under follow-up. Patients with type II fracture had 2nd PPVI or are awaiting such procedure, and 1 patient with type III fracture required surgical explantation. Conclusion— Stent fracture after PPVI can be managed effectively by risk stratification, systematic classification, and anticipatory management strategies. Serial x-ray and echocardiography are recommended for surveillance.
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
Feltes, T. F., Bacha, E., Beekman, R. H., Cheatham, J. P., Feinstein, J. A., Gomes, A. S., Hijazi, Z. M., Ing, F. F., de Moor, M., Morrow, W. R., et al. (2011) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e31821b1f10 · Cited by 853
Apitz, C., Webb, G. D., & Redington, A. N. (2009) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60657-7 · Cited by 653
Lurz, P., Coats, L., Khambadkone, S., Nordmeyer, J., Boudjemline, Y., Schievano, S., Muthurangu, V., Lee, T. Y., Parenzan, G., Derrick, G., et al. (2008) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.107.735779 · Cited by 481
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Nordmeyer, J., Khambadkone, S., Coats, L., Schievano, S., Lurz, P., Parenzan, G., Taylor, A. M., Lock, J. E., & Bonhoeffer, P.
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 2007-03-20
- Volume
- 115
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1392-1397
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W2058418973
- Cited by
- 214
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.42
- 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: Risk Stratification, Systematic Classification, and Anticipatory Management Strategies for Stent Fracture After Percutaneous Pulmonary Valve Implantation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.106.674259
- The paper
- Nordmeyer, J., Khambadkone, S., Coats, L., Schievano, S., Lurz, P., Parenzan, G., Taylor, A. M., Lock, J. E., & Bonhoeffer, P. (2007). Risk Stratification, Systematic Classification, and Anticipatory Management Strategies for Stent Fracture After Percutaneous Pulmonary Valve Implantation. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.106.674259
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.