Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35438078›Full record

ReviewEuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology2022

Intravascular ultrasound guidance for lower extremity arterial and venous interventions.

Eric A Secemsky, Sahil A Parikh, Maureen Kohi, Michael Lichtenberg, Mark Meissner, Ramon Varcoe, Andrew Holden, Michael Jaff, David Chalyan, Daniel Clair and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance During Peripheral Vascular Interventions: Long-term Clinical Outcomes and Costs From the Japanese Perspective.Journal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists · 2025
    Observational
  7. The Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound Use on 1-Year Outcomes After Infrapopliteal Endovascular Intervention.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Maneuvering Through the Uncertainty of Deep Vein Thrombosis Interventions: An Encouraging Contemporary Analysis.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2024
    Article
  10. DETECT-DVT: Detroit Evaluation of Thrombectomy and Evaluation of Intravascular Ultrasound in Deep Vein Thrombosis.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. State-of-the-Art Endovascular Therapies for the Femoropopliteal Segment: Are We There Yet?Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 10 institutions in 5 countries.

Eric A SecemskyRichard A. and Susan F. Smith Center for Outcomes Research in Cardiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Sahil A ParikhCenter for Interventional Vascular Therapy and Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Maureen KohiDepartment of Radiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Michael LichtenbergClinic for Angiology, Klinikum Arnsberg, Arnsberg, Germany.
Mark MeissnerDepartment of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.
Ramon VarcoeDepartment of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Andrew HoldenDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand.
Michael JaffHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
David ChalyanDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.
Daniel ClairDepartment of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Beau HawkinsDivision of Cardiology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA.
Kenneth RosenfieldDivision of Cardiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Auckland City Hospital · NZBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USHarvard University · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USPrince of Wales Hospital · AUUniversity of California, Irvine · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center · USUniversity of Washington · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · US

Funding

Shared Decision-Making to Improve the Health Status of Patients with Claudication: Developing and Implementing Strategies to Individualize Treatment DecisionsK23HL150290 · NHLBI · BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER · PI SECEMSKY, ERIC ALEXANDER · 2020 to 2024
$851k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL150290
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review details the utility of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) for the management of peripheral artery and venous disease. The purpose of this document is to provide an update in the use of IVUS in peripheral arterial and venous pathology and demonstrate the use of IVUS as a practical diagnostic imaging procedure to evaluate and treat peripheral vascular disorders. IVUS, a diagnostic tool that relies on sound waves to produce precise images of the vessel being evaluated, was originally introduced to the medical community for the purposes of peripheral artery imaging, though it was quickly adapted for coronary interventions with positive outcomes. The utility of IVUS includes vessel measurement, pre- and post-procedural planning, treatment optimisation, and detection of thrombus, dissection or calcium severity. While angiography remains the standard imaging approach during peripheral intervention, multiple observational studies and small prospective trials have shown that in comparison, IVUS provides more accurate imaging detail, which may improve procedural outcomes. IVUS can also address limitations of angiography, including the need to administer contrast medium and eliminate the ambiguity associated with other forms of imaging. This review provides contemporary examples of where IVUS is being used during peripheral intervention as well as representative imaging to serve as a resource for the practising clinician.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseUltrasonography, InterventionalArteriesCalciumCoronary AngiographyHumansLower ExtremityProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeCalcium

Identifiers

PMID35438078
PMCPMC10331977
OpenAlexW4224265930

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.