SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Impact of percutaneous coronary intervention with different guidance modalities in patients with coronary artery lesions: a network meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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.
- Development and validation of a risk prediction model for myocardial hypoperfusion after primary PCI in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Traditional coronary angiography has inherent limitations in terms of lesion assessment and stenting. New guidance modalities to guide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are now available. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for the period from the time of construction to 25 April 2024. A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) was performed to determine the optimal treatment strategy by comparing the short-term outcome and long-term prognosis of adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with coronary artery lesions after eight different PCI-guided modalities. The clinical outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization (TVR). Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Results: Forty randomized controlled trials with a total of 38,107 patients were included. In the MACE subgroup up to 12 months, Intravascular Ultrasound-guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (IVUS-PCI) [RR = 1.60, 95%CI = (1.10, 2.30)], Optical Frequency Domain Imaging-guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (OFDI-PCI) [RR = 2.36, 95%CI = (1.05, 5.80)] and Quantitative Flow Ratio-guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (QFR-PCI) [RR = 1.45, 95%CI = (1.15, 1.83)] significantly reduced the incidence of MACE. In the MACE subgroup at 12 months, Fractional Flow Reserve-guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (FFR-PCI) [RR = 0.72, 95%CI = (0.49, 0.99)], IVUS-PCI [RR = 0.66, 95%CI = (0.43, 0.99)] and Optical Coherence Tomography-guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [RR = 0.59, 95%CI = (0.35, 0.92)] all significantly reduced the incidence of MACE in patients. FFR-PCI [RR = 0.42, 95%CI = (0.20, 0.75)] significantly reduced the incidence of cardiac death in patients compared to Angiography-guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Angio-PCI). FFR-PCI [RR = 0.78, 95%CI = (0.62, 0.99)], OCT-PCI [RR = 0.59, 95%CI = (0.35, 0.97)], QFR-PCI [RR = 0.64, 95%CI = (0.45, 0.91)] were associated with a lower risk of myocardial infarction compared to Angio-PCI. The incidence of Target Vessel Revascularization (TVR) was significantly lower in patients who underwent IVUS-PCI [RR = 0.57, 95%CI = (0.36, 0.86)], OCT-PCI [RR = 0.47, 95%CI = (0.24, 0.95)] than in those who underwent Angio-PCI. However, there were no significant differences between the different guidance modalities and subgroup analyses in improving overall survival. Conclusion: IVUS and OCT were more effective in reducing MACE and TVR. This suggests that IVUS and OCT may be the best strategies in the interventional management of complex coronary lesions. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42024567598.
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.