↓ Skip to main content

First- Versus Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Acute Coronary Syndromes (Katowice-Zabrze Registry)

Overview of attention for article published in Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
First- Versus Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Acute Coronary Syndromes (Katowice-Zabrze Registry)
Published in
Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, April 2016
DOI 10.5935/abc.20160043
Pubmed ID
Authors

Damian Kawecki, Beata Morawiec, Janusz Dola, Wojciech Wanha, Grzegorz Smolka, Aleksandra Pluta, Kamil Marcinkiewicz, Andrzej Ochała, Ewa Nowalany-Kozielska, Wojciech Wojakowski

Abstract

There are sparse data on the performance of different types of drug-eluting stents (DES) in acute and real-life setting. The aim of the study was to compare the safety and efficacy of first- versus second-generation DES in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). This all-comer registry enrolled consecutive patients diagnosed with ACS and treated with percutaneous coronary intervention with the implantation of first- or second-generation DES in one-year follow-up. The primary efficacy endpoint was defined as major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, target-vessel revascularization and stroke. The primary safety outcome was definite stent thrombosis (ST) at one year. From the total of 1916 patients enrolled into the registry, 1328 patients were diagnosed with ACS. Of them, 426 were treated with first- and 902 with second-generation DES. There was no significant difference in the incidence of MACCE between two types of DES at one year. The rate of acute and subacute ST was higher in first- vs. second-generation DES (1.6% vs. 0.1%, p < 0.001, and 1.2% vs. 0.2%, p = 0.025, respectively), but there was no difference regarding late ST (0.7% vs. 0.2%, respectively, p = 0.18) and gastrointestinal bleeding (2.1% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.21). In Cox regression, first-generation DES was an independent predictor for cumulative ST (HR 3.29 [1.30-8.31], p = 0.01). In an all-comer registry of ACS, the one-year rate of MACCE was comparable in groups treated with first- and second-generation DES. The use of first-generation DES was associated with higher rates of acute and subacute ST and was an independent predictor of cumulative ST.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 20%
Other 4 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 16%
Researcher 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 4 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 36%
Engineering 3 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Materials Science 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 9 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 April 2016.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia
#1,002
of 1,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,592
of 315,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia
#16
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,210 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,549 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.