Trial reportCatheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions2025
Impact of Coronary Calcification on Complete Revascularization in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease.
Trial report in Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Predictors of major adverse cardiac events, high radiation exposure, and contrast use in percutaneous coronary interventions for calcified lesions.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCoronary calcification is a well-known marker of atherosclerotic plaque burden and a determinant of stent under expansion with unfavorable long-term outcomes.
aimsThis sub study of the randomized BIOVASC trial aimed to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and multi vessel disease (MVD), stratified by calcification of the culprit lesion.
methodsThe primary endpoint consisted of a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, unplanned ischemia driven revascularization (UIDR) and cerebrovascular events at 2 year follow-up. Secondary endpoints included the individual components of the primary composite and major bleedings. We used cox regression models to relate study endpoints with randomized treatment stratified by calcification of the culprit lesion.
resultsThe BIOVASC trial enrolled 103 patients with a moderately or severely calcified culprit lesion. The composite primary outcome occurred in 8/57 (14.3%) versus 9/46 (19.7%) patients randomized to ICR and SCR (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66% and 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-1.71, p = 0.39). In the non-calcified culprit lesions, there were 83 events in the ICR (12.4%) and 82 events in the SCR (11.9%) (HR 1.01 [0.75-1.37], p = 0.94, P-interaction = 0.42). There was no evidence of a differential effect of ICR vs. SCR on the primary endpoint in relation to culprit lesion calcification (P-interaction = 0.42).
conclusionNo differential treatment effect of ICR versus SCR was observed when comparing the primary composite outcome between calcified and non-calcified culprit lesion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.