ReviewJournal of cardiology2022
Robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention in the COVID-19 pandemic.
Review in Journal of cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted versus manual percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Procedural and Clinical Outcomes of Second-generation Robotic-assisted versus Manual Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A 1-year Follow-up Study.Interventional cardiology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Review
- Latest Developments in Robotic Percutaneous Coronary Interventions.Interventional cardiology (London, England) · 2023Review
- Impact of COVID-19 on Management Strategies for Coronary and Structural Heart Disease Interventions.Current cardiology reports · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) has a profound impact on the health care system worldwide. In the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitals are required to halt elective surgeries and procedures for preventing nosocomial infections and saving medical resources. In these situations, emergency procedures are required for life-threatening cardiovascular diseases such as acute coronary syndrome and cardiogenic shock. To prevent the spread of COVID-19, a social distance is essentially required. In ordinary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), operators manipulate the devices standing at the patient's tableside during the whole procedure, which may involve a certain risk of exposure to patients with COVID-19. A robotic-assisted PCI (R-PCI) allows operators to manipulate devices remotely, sitting at a cockpit located several meters away from the patient, and in addition, the assistant can be at the foot of the bed, much further from the access site. R-PCI can help to minimize the radiation exposure and the amount of person-to-person contact, and consequently may reduce the risk for the exposure to the virus.
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.