GuidelineHeart (British Cardiac Society)2015
Percutaneous coronary intervention in the UK: recommendations for good practice 2015.
Guideline in Heart (British Cardiac Society), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.
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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 107 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of cerebrovascular center volume with patient outcomes.Neurosurgical review · 2026Review
- Influence of 5A-Based Self-Regulated Nursing Intervention on Self-Care Capability and Well-Being Among PCI Recipients with Coronary Heart Disease.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- The severity of coronary heart disease and the incidence and severity of following obstructive sleep apnea: a population-based cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Exploring the impact of the Index of Multiple Deprivation on percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes: Insights from the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society database.Global cardiology science & practice · 2025Article
- Low-dose dobutamine stress myocardial contrast echocardiography for evaluating myocardial microcirculation perfusion and predicting long-term prognosis in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Evaluation of the UK Intervention Subspecialty Programme: The Trainees' Experience.Interventional cardiology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the UK: Recommendations of the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society.Interventional cardiology (London, England) · 2025Review
- Outcomes of PCI of all comers: the experience of a Kuwaiti independent healthcare institution.The British journal of cardiology · 2024Article
- Procedural Results and Long-term Outcome of Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in a UK Non-surgical Centre.Interventional cardiology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Impella-Driven High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Novel, Single Non-Surgical-Centre Case Report.Cureus · 2023Article
- Mechanical Circulatory Support for Complex High-risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.US cardiology · 2023Review
- Center Volumes Correlate with Likelihood of Stent Implantation in German Coronary Angiography.Journal of interventional cardiology · 2023Article
- Correlation between coronary heart disease severity and subsequent chronic rhinosinusitis severity: A retrospective cohort study.International journal of medical sciences · 2023Article
- Noncoding RNAs in Vascular Cell Biology and Restenosis.Biology · 2022Review
- Article
- British Cardiovascular Interventional Society Consensus Position Statement on Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest 1: Pathway of Care.Interventional cardiology (London, England) · 2022Review
- Article
- Article
- Cardiogenic Shock: Protocols, Teams, Centers, and Networks.US cardiology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the last 35 years, there has been dramatic progress in the technology and applicability of percutaneous techniques to treat obstructive coronary heart disease. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has a considerable evidence base and it is firmly established as the most common procedure used in the invasive treatment of patients with coronary heart disease in the UK. This set of guidelines aims to address specifically issues relating to PCI and not the growing subspecialty of structural heart disease intervention. It is not intended to provide a review of the entire evidence base for coronary intervention. The evidence base relating to PCI is extensively reviewed in international guidelines and the British Cardiovascular Intervention society endorses these guidelines and their updates. The guidelines presented here focus on issues pertinent to practice within the UK and set out a recommended template to ensure optimal delivery of patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.