SynthesisClinical cardiology2026
IVUS-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided PCI for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and GRADE Assessment of Randomized Trials.
Synthesis in Clinical cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has been increasingly used as an adjunctive tool for complex percutaneous interventions (PCIs); however, comparative randomized evidence with conventional angiography in unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease remains scarce and fragmented. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess and synthesize evidence regarding its use in ULMCA disease.
methodsWe performed a systematic literature search across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane until April 2026 to identify relevant RCTs comparing IVUS-guided PCI with conventional angiography-guided PCI in ULMCA disease. Risk of bias of studies was assessed using the Cochrane RoB-2 tool. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed in R, with an exploratory univariate meta-regression of covariates.
resultsFour randomized trials involving 2278 patients with ULMCA disease were included. Compared with angiography-guided PCI, IVUS guidance was associated with numerically lower risks of all-cause death, cardiac death, target lesion revascularization, and target vessel revascularization, while myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis were similar between groups.
conclusionIn patients undergoing PCI for ULMCA disease, IVUS guidance was associated with numerically favorable but statistically nonsignificant reductions in mortality and repeat revascularization, without clear differences in myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. Although randomized evidence is still lacking to determine clinical superiority, these results justify powered future trials to determine whether the effects of IVUS guidance vary according to prior myocardial infarction status and left ventricular ejection fraction.
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.