Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42405660›Full record

ReviewCatheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions2026

Current Advances and Navigating the Complexities of SVG-PCI.

Tanawat Attachaipanich, Hafeez Ul Hassan Virk, Muzamil Khawaja, Mahboob Alam, Chayakrit Krittanawong

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 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

5 authors.

Tanawat AttachaipanichDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, Missouri, USA.
Hafeez Ul Hassan VirkDivision of Cardiovascular Disease, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9835-942X
Muzamil KhawajaDepartment of Cardiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Mahboob AlamTexas Heart Institute and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9230-9555
Chayakrit KrittanawongHumanX, Delaware, Delaware, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Saphenous vein graft (SVG) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains technically challenging and clinically high risk due to the friable, thrombus-rich nature of SVG lesions, which predispose to distal embolization, no-reflow, and periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI). The role of embolic protection devices in contemporary practice remains unclear. Although early randomized trials demonstrated significant reductions in periprocedural MI and no-reflow, contemporary observational studies and meta-analyses have not shown consistent clinical benefit. Similarly, while intracoronary imaging modalities provide detailed plaque characterization, their clinical application in guiding SVG-PCI remains unclear. Revascularization after prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) requires individualized, multidisciplinary decision-making. Factors favoring PCI include a patent left internal mammary artery (IMA)-left anterior descending artery graft and suitable coronary anatomy, whereas redo-CABG may be preferred in patients with multiple failing grafts or complex anatomy in which an IMA conduit can be used. Although guidelines have historically favored native-vessel PCI when feasible, the only randomized trial comparing SVG-PCI with native-vessel PCI in a contemporary setting demonstrated that SVG-PCI may offer superior outcomes in certain patient populations, particularly when native coronary disease is complex, and the chronic total occlusion burden is high. Predictors of adverse outcomes have been identified across patient-, lesion-, and procedure-related characteristics; however, their integration into clinical decision-making is limited by the lack of validated risk-stratification tools. Future randomized studies in the contemporary PCI era are needed. Additionally, the integration of imaging technologies, together with artificial intelligence and machine-learning-enhanced risk prediction models, may help individualize patient selection and optimize procedural strategy.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery BypassCoronary Artery DiseaseGraft Occlusion, VascularPercutaneous Coronary InterventionSaphenous VeinClinical Decision-MakingEmbolic Protection DevicesHumansMyocardial InfarctionPatient SelectionPredictive Value of TestsRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID42405660
PMCPMC13532512

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.