ArticleCureus2019
Coronary Artery Ectasia: An Insight into Intraprocedural and Postprocedural Management Strategies.
Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Double Barrel DCB in a Giant Ostial LAD.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- Horrifying shift of a giant thrombus during coronary intervention.European heart journal. Case reports · 2022Article
- Five-years' prognostic analysis for coronary artery ectasia patients with coronary atherosclerosis: A retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Could the Novel Oral Anticoagulants Be Used for Coronary Artery Aneurysm?Case reports in medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronary artery ectasia (CAE) can present as an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with a high clot burden in ectatic coronary arteries. Thrombectomy with intracoronary thrombolysis often does not ensure immediate blood flow. Also, there have not been clear guidelines regarding long-term management in such cases. A 40-year-old male presented with anginal chest discomfort and a working diagnosis of non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) was made. The initial angiography showed thrombotic occlusion of several large and ectatic coronary arteries with visibly swirling blood flow. The culprit lesions were treated with balloon angioplasty and multiple rounds of thrombectomy yielding red thrombi. Interestingly, the post-intervention antegrade flow decreased in both vessels (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score: 0), possibly because of the distal migration of the clots. Peri-procedure, the patient received two boluses of eptifibatide, 180 mcg/kg each, followed by a continuous infusion of 2 mcg/kg/minute for 18 hours. Afterward, the patient was started on ticagrelor and continued on daily aspirin, high-intensity statin, beta blocker, and Coumadin® with heparin bridge. During the one year follow-up period, the Coumadin was switched to rivaroxaban, ticagrelor was stopped after six months, and the patient was continued on guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for coronary artery disease (CAD) with favorable outcomes. The presented case gives us an insight into not only the intra-procedural but also the post-procedural management of ACS in the setting of CAE, and that is thrombectomy alone followed by longer duration oral anticoagulation in addition to GDMT for CAD. However, it will be interesting to see future studies aimed toward defining the duration as well as the choice of anticoagulation, i.e., dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) alone or in combination with warfarin/novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs).
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.