Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41560487›Full record

ReviewKorean circulation journal2026

Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients Receiving Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Bifurcation Lesions.

Jeehoon Kang, Bon-Kwon Koo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Korean circulation journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jeehoon KangDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9078-2231
Bon-Kwon KooDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea. bkkoo@snu.ac.kr.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8188-3348

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antiplatelet therapy is crucial for patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but there is limited high-quality evidence guiding the best strategy for those with bifurcation lesions. The antiplatelet strategy for bifurcation PCI requires balancing the patient's overall thrombotic and bleeding risks. Bifurcation lesions present a complex, high-thrombotic-risk milieu because the procedure often causes plaque disruption and forms an inevitable gap in the sealing of the stent, compounded by turbulent blood flow that promotes thrombosis. Factors like stent malapposition, underexpansion, and low/oscillatory shear stress also contribute to increased local thrombotic risk, making the optimal antiplatelet therapy for bifurcation PCI difficult to define. Previous observational registry data broadly suggested a prolonged duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) may be safer than a shorter duration of DAPT in reducing major adverse clinical outcomes. However, the reliability of these findings is limited by the inherent flaws of registry data, including the retrospective study design, lack of clinical event adjudication, and lack of specific protocol of PCI or DAPT strategy. Moreover, specific lesions factors such as complex PCI and left main bifurcation lesions or patient factors such as the presence of high bleeding risk or clopidogrel resistance necessitate special consideration, which leads to a individualized DAPT strategy beyond registry generalizations. The future of care points toward precision medicine, necessitating dedicated, prospective randomized controlled trials with standardized procedures to establish clear, evidence-based recommendations.

Indexed as

AntiplateletBifurcationPercutaneous coronary intervention

Identifiers

PMID41560487
PMCPMC13591139

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.