ArticleScientific reports2020
Comparison of the incidence of slow flow after rotational atherectomy with IVUS-crossable versus IVUS-uncrossable calcified lesions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical expert consensus document on rotational atherectomy from the Japanese association of cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics: update 2026.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Secondary rotational atherectomy is associated with reduced occurrence of prolonged ST-segment elevation following ablation.Internal and emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Lifetime management of severely calcified coronary lesions: the treatment algorithm focused on the shape of calcification.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2023Review
- Clinical expert consensus document on rotational atherectomy from the Japanese association of cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics: update 2023.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2023Review
- Intravascular ultrasound-factors associated with slow flow following rotational atherectomy in heavily calcified coronary artery.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- The Impact of Intracoronary Imaging on PCI Outcomes in Cases Utilising Rotational Atherectomy: An Analysis of 8,417 Rotational Atherectomy Cases from the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Database.Journal of interventional cardiology · 2022Article
- Comparison of the incidence of periprocedural myocardial infarction between percutaneous coronary intervention with versus without rotational atherectomy using propensity score-matching.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Clinical expert consensus document on rotational atherectomy from the Japanese association of cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2021Review
- Modifiable and unmodifiable factors associated with slow flow following rotational atherectomy.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although the usefulness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in rotational atherectomy (RA) has been widely recognized, an IVUS catheter may not cross the target lesion because of severe calcification. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of slow flow following RA between IVUS-crossable versus IVUS-uncrossable calcified lesions. We included 284 RA lesions, and divided into an IVUS-crossable group (n = 150) and an IVUS-uncrossable group (n = 134). The primary endpoint was slow flow just after RA. The incidence of slow flow (TIMI flow grade ≤ 2) was significantly greater in the IVUS-uncrossable group than in the IVUS-crossable group (26.1% vs. 10.7%, p = 0.001). The incidence of severe slow flow (TIMI grade ≤ 1) was also greater in the IVUS-uncrossable group than in the IVUS-crossable group (9.7% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.022). The multivariate logistic regression model showed a significant association between slow flow and pre-IVUS uncrossed lesions (vs. crossed lesions: odds ratio 2.103, 95% confidence interval 1.047-4.225, p = 0.037). In conclusion, the incidence of slow flow/severe slow flow just after RA was significantly greater in the IVUS-uncrossable lesions than in the IVUS-crossable lesions. Our study suggests the possibility that the IVUS-crossability can be used as a risk stratification of severe calcified lesions.
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.