ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2021
Percutaneous coronary intervention in side branch coronary arteries: Insights from the Japanese nationwide registry.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- 2026 revised CVIT clinical expert consensus on drug coated balloons for coronary artery disease.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Article
- Are we at dawn of the drug-coated balloons era? Current evidence, future directions, and tasks of the newly established working group of the Association of Cardiovascular Interventions.Cardiology journal · 2024Article
- Clinical expert consensus document on drug-coated balloon for coronary artery disease from the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2023Review
- A wide-angle lens to focus on coronary bifurcational lesions.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2022Article
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 at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPerformance of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in side-branch vessels (SB-PCI) has not been fully investigated despite the technical advancement of PCI.
methodsWe investigated 257,492 patients registered in the Japanese nationwide PCI registry from January to December 2018; 199,767 (78%) underwent PCI for major vessel PCI (MV-PCI), 21,555 (8.4%) underwent SB-PCI, and 24,862 (9.6%) underwent PCI for both vessels (SB + MV-PCI). The frequencies of primary composite adverse events, defined as in-hospital mortality and procedural complications (i.e.,
resultsFewer drug-eluting stents (66% vs. 86%) and more drug-coated balloons (23% vs. 9%) were used in SB-PCI than in MV-PCI (p < 0.001). Pre-procedure non-invasive testing was similarly performed in SB-PCI and MV-PCI (57% vs. 61%). The composite endpoint was observed in 0.7%, 1.9%, and 2.2% of the SB-PCI, SB + MV-PCI, and MV-PCI groups, respectively (p < 0.001). Institutional frequency of SB-PCI was inversely associated with the composite-endpoint risk for all PCI procedures (odds ratio 1.37, 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.81 in the lowest tertile, with reference to the middle tertile, p = 0.02). Frequency of PCI for restenotic lesions was also inversely associated with the institutional frequency of MV-PCI (p < 0.001).
conclusionSB-PCI was performed safely with a low frequency of acute complications, and higher SB-PCI frequency presented a lower risk of in-hospital adverse events, albeit with a cost of an increase in PCI for restenotic 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.