Cited by 63Coronary Interventions and DiagnosticsAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular DiseasesAcute Myocardial Infarction Research

Predicting the Restenosis Benefit of Drug-Eluting Versus Bare Metal Stents in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Yeh, Robert W., Normand, Sharon-Lise T., Wolf, Robert E., Jones, Philip G., Ho, Kalon K.L., Cohen, David J., Cutlip, Donald E., Mauri, Laura +3 more·2011·Circulation

Abstract

Background—: Drug-eluting stents (DES) for percutaneous coronary intervention decrease the risk of restenosis compared with bare metal stents. However, they are costlier, require prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy, and provide the most benefit in patients at highest risk for restenosis. To assist physicians in targeting DES use in patients at the highest risk for target vessel revascularization (TVR), we developed and validated a model to predict TVR. Methods and Results—: Preprocedural clinical and angiographic data from 27 107 percutaneous coronary intervention hospitalizations between October 1, 2004, and September 30, 2007, in Massachusetts were used to develop prediction models for TVR at 1 year. Models were developed from a two-thirds random sample and validated in the remaining third. The overall rate of TVR was 7.6% (6.7% with DES, 11% with bare metal stents). Significant predictors of TVR included prior percutaneous coronary intervention, emergency or salvage percutaneous coronary intervention, prior coronary bypass surgery, peripheral vascular disease, diabetes mellitus, and angiographic characteristics. The model was superior to a 3-variable model of diabetes mellitus, stent diameter, and stent length (c statistic, 0.66 versus 0.60; P <0.001) and was well calibrated. The predicted number needed to treat with DES to prevent 1 TVR compared with bare metal stents ranged from 6 (95% confidence interval, 5.4–7.6) to 80 (95% confidence interval, 62.7–116.3), depending on patients' clinical and angiographic factors. Conclusions—: A predictive model using commonly collected variables can identify patients who may derive the greatest benefit in TVR reduction from DES. Whether use of the model improves the safety and cost-effectiveness of DES use should be tested prospectively.

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.111.045229

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. depending on patient characteristics. Because the predicted benefit associated with drug-eluting stents varies broadly among patients, this predictive model may be used to support the optimal use of drug-eluting stents in a prospective fashion and to engage patients in the decision-making process before coronary intervention. Go to http://cme.ahajournals.org to take the CME quiz for this article.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yeh, R. W., Normand, S.-L. T., Wolf, R. E., Jones, P. G., Ho, K. K. L., Cohen, D. J., Cutlip, D. E., Mauri, L., Kugelmass, A. D., Amin, A. P., & Spertus, J. A.
Affiliations
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Venue
Circulation
Published
2011-10-04
Volume
124
Issue
14
Pages
1557-1564
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2151959401
Cited by
63
References
33
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 14
FWCI
10.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Circulation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Antiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
Keywords
drug-eluting stents, bare-metal stents, percutaneous coronary intervention, target vessel revascularization, restenosis, prediction model, patient selection, diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, coronary artery disease, number needed to treat, cost-effectiveness
MeSH terms
Aged, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Humans, Male, Massachusetts, Middle Aged, Models, Cardiovascular, Registries, Stents, Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary, Coronary Angiography, Coronary Restenosis, Coronary Stenosis, Drug-Eluting Stents

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