| Title |
Everolimus-eluting stent platforms in percutaneous coronary intervention: comparative effectiveness and outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/mder.s66360 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vasileios F Panoulas, Ioannis Mastoris, Klio Konstantinou, Maurizio Tespili, Alfonso Ielasi |
| Abstract |
Despite the remarkable benefits obtained following the introduction of the first-generation drug-eluting stent (DES), concerns were raised over its long-term safety, particularly with regard to very late (beyond 1 year) stent thrombosis. Newer-generation DESs have been developed to overcome this limitation using novel stent platforms, new drugs, more biocompatible durable polymers, and bioabsorbable polymers or backbones. To date, new-generation DESs have virtually replaced the use of first-generation DESs worldwide. In this review article, we discuss in detail the design, pharmacology, and mechanism of action of the newer-generation permanent and bioresorbable everolimus-eluting platforms. Furthermore, we present and evaluate the current evidence on the performance and safety of these devices compared to those of other available stent platforms. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 36 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Unknown | 11 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 30% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 15 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 July 2015.
All research outputs
#16,106,935
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#173
of 314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,470
of 277,768 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 277,768 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.