Evidence mapPaperPMID 42048801Full record

ArticleJACC. Advances2026

Postdilation Strategies Following Provisional Stenting of Left Main Coronary Bifurcations: Insights From Patient-Specific Computational Simulations.

Shijia Zhao, Wei Wu, Changkye Lee, Yash Vardhan Trivedi, Priyansh Patel, Parth Munjal, Ruben K A Tapia-Orihuela, Rakshita Ramesh Bhat, Rahul Chikatimalla, Varsha Miriyala and 19 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JACC. Advances, 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

29 authors.

Shijia ZhaoCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Wei WuCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Changkye LeeCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Yash Vardhan TrivediCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Priyansh PatelCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Parth MunjalCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Ruben K A Tapia-OrihuelaCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Rakshita Ramesh BhatCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Rahul ChikatimallaCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Varsha MiriyalaCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Yaman IssaCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Muhammad Fiyaz AlamCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Parth Vikram SinghCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Haritha DarapaneniCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Sree Sindhu VijayaraoCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Abdulkader ShaarCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Jeevan Kumar SahniCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Kanishka GoswamiCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Aman AgrawalCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Ioanna ChatzizisiCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Yves LouvardRamsay Générale de Santé-Institut Cardiovasculaire Paris Sud, Hôpital Privé Jacques Cartier, Massy, France.
Goran StankovicDepartment of Cardiology, Clinical Center of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia and Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
Jens F LassenDepartment of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital & University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Yoshinobu MurasatoDepartment of Cardiology, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Medical Center, Fukuoka, Japan.
Thomas W JohnsonDepartment of Cardiology, Bristol Heart Institute, University Hospitals Bristol & Weston NHSFT, Bristol, United Kingdom; University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Francesco BurzottaDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy; Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Emmanouil S BrilakisCenter for Complex Coronary Interventions, Minneapolis Heart Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
George DangasDepartment of Cardiovascular Division, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA.
Yiannis S ChatzizisisCenter for Digital Cardiovascular Innovations, Cardiovascular Division, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA. Electronic address: ychatzizisis@icloud.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProvisional stenting is the preferred percutaneous coronary intervention strategy for noncomplex left main (LM) bifurcations; yet, the optimal postdilation strategy remains debated.

objectivesThe objective of the study was to quantitatively compare postdilation techniques following LM provisional stenting using validated computational simulations.

methodsFour patient-specific LM bifurcations were reconstructed in three dimensions and virtually stented. Seven postdilation techniques were evaluated: 1) standard proximal optimization technique (POT; P); 2) POT and simultaneous kissing balloon inflation (KBI); 3) POT and simultaneous KBI and re-POT; 4) POT and sequential KBI; 5) POT plus sequential and simultaneous KBI; 6) POT plus sequential and simultaneous KBI with re-POT; and 7) POT plus left circumflex dilation and re-POT (P-S-P). Techniques were compared based on lumen/stent morphology and hemodynamics.

resultsP ranked lowest overall, resulting in 27% smaller ostial area, 59% greater stent jailing, and 76% larger area exposed to high wall shear stress gradient at the left circumflex ostium compared with other techniques. P-S-P ranked second lowest, yielding 14% smaller ostial area and 29% greater area exposed to high relative residence time at the left anterior descending artery ostium. Techniques incorporating KBI showed the most favorable performance, with combined sequential and simultaneous KBI performing best, particularly in calcified or fibrous plaques. Final POT after KBI did not confer incremental benefit.

conclusionsKBI is superior to P or P-S-P. Combined high-pressure sequential and nominal-pressure simultaneous KBI outperforms sequential or simultaneous KBI alone, particularly in stiff calcified or fibrous lesions. Final POT after KBI provides no incremental advantage.

Indexed as

coronary bifurcationhemodynamicskissing balloon inflationpatient-specific computational simulationsproximal optimization technique

Identifiers

PMID42048801
PMCPMC13138047

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.