Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 490

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Drug-Eluting and Bare Nitinol Stents for the Treatment of Atherosclerotic Lesions in the Superficial Femoral Artery:Long-term Results From the SIROCCO Trial

Duda, Stephan H., Bosiers, Marc, Lammer, Johannes, Scheinert, Dierk, Zeller, Thomas, Oliva, Vincent, Tielbeek, Alexander, Anderson, John, Wiesinger, Benjamin, Tepe, Gunnar, Lansky, Alexandra, Jaff, Michael R., Mudde, Catharina, Tielemans, Hans, Beregi, Jean-Paul·2006·Journal of Endovascular Therapy

Abstract

PURPOSE: To review clinical outcomes of patients with chronic limb ischemia and TASC type C lesions treated with sirolimus-eluting versus bare SMART nitinol self-expanding stents. METHODS: Data were obtained from a randomized, multicenter, double-blinded study conducted in 2 phases. All 93 patients had chronic limb ischemia and superficial femoral artery (SFA) occlusions or stenoses (average lesion length 8.3 cm). In total, 47 patients (31 men; mean age 66.3+/-9.1 years, range 50-84) received the sirolimus-eluting SMART stent and 46 patients (36 men; mean age 65.9 +/-10.8 years, range 38-83) received a bare SMART nitinol stent. Both groups were followed for a mean 24 months. RESULTS: Both the sirolimus-eluting and the bare SMART stents were effective in revascularizing the diseased SFA and in sustaining freedom from restenosis. For both types of stents, improvements in ankle-brachial indices (ABI) and symptoms of claudication were maintained over 24 months (median 24-month ABI 0.96 for the sirolimus group versus 0.87 for the bare stent group, p>0.05). At 24 months, the restenosis rate in the sirolimus group was 22.9% versus 21.1% in the bare stent group (p>0.05). The cumulative in-stent restenosis rates according to duplex ultrasound were 4.7%, 9.0%, 15.6%, and 21.9%, respectively, at 6, 9, 18, and 24 months; the rates did not differ significantly between the treatment groups. The TLR rate for the sirolimus group was 6% and for the bare stent group 13%; the TVR rates were somewhat higher: 13% and 22%, respectively. Mortality rates did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that the sirolimus-eluting and the bare SMART stent are effective, safe, and free from restenosis in a majority of patients for up to 24 months. Because the restenosis rate in the bare stent group is unexpectedly low, no significant difference could be found between the sirolimus-eluting and the bare SMART stents.

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 · 10.1583/05-1704.1

Cites

8 of 8 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 8 references

Cited by

See all 490

Metadata

Authors
Duda, S. H., Bosiers, M., Lammer, J., Scheinert, D., Zeller, T., Oliva, V., Tielbeek, A., Anderson, J., Wiesinger, B., Tepe, G., Lansky, A., Jaff, M. R., Mudde, C., Tielemans, H., & Beregi, J.-P.
Venue
Journal of Endovascular Therapy
Published
2006-12
Volume
13
Issue
6
Pages
701-710
ISSN
  • 1526-6028 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-1550
OpenAlex
W2102187172
Cited by
490
References
8
FWCI
26.49
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: Drug-Eluting and Bare Nitinol Stents for the Treatment of Atherosclerotic Lesions in the Superficial Femoral Artery:Long-term Results From the SIROCCO Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1583/05-1704.1
The paper
Duda, S. H., Bosiers, M., Lammer, J., Scheinert, D., Zeller, T., Oliva, V., Tielbeek, A., Anderson, J., Wiesinger, B., Tepe, G., Lansky, A., Jaff, M. R., Mudde, C., Tielemans, H., & Beregi, J.-P. (2006). Drug-Eluting and Bare Nitinol Stents for the Treatment of Atherosclerotic Lesions in the Superficial Femoral Artery:Long-term Results From the SIROCCO Trial. Journal of Endovascular Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1583/05-1704.1

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.