ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Rotational atherectomy for chronically and totally occluded coronary lesions: A propensity score-matched outcomes study.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and feasibility of rotational atherectomy in chronic total occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Clinical validation study of a novel prognostic risk prediction model (CHIP Score) for interventional therapy in patients with NSTE-ACS-a single-center retrospective cohort study based on 348 patients.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Rotational vs. laser atherectomy in Chinese CTO-PCI: lesion-specific efficacy with comparable midterm safety.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Chronic total occlusion rotational atherectomy (CTO RA) versus non-CTO RA in coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complications.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite advances being made in techniques and devices, certain chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesions remain uncrossable or undilatable. Rotational atherectomy (RA) is usually necessary for such lesions to achieve successful revascularization. Methods: Information regarding consecutive patients who underwent coronary RA was retrieved from the catheterization laboratory database. Patients who underwent RA for CTO lesion refractory using other conventional devices were recruited, with propensity score-matched cases serving as controls. Results: A total of 411 patients underwent coronary RA in the study period. Most patients had high-risk features (65.7% had acute coronary syndrome (ACS), 14.1% ischemic cardiomyopathy, and 5.1% cardiogenic shock), while only 20.2% of the patients had stable angina. Among them, 44 patients underwent RA for CTO lesions (CTO group), whereas the propensity score matched controls consist of 37 patients (non-CTO group). The baseline characteristics, high-risk features, coronary artery disease (CAD) vessel numbers, left ventricular function and biochemistry profiles of both groups were the same except for more patients with diabetes (67.6% vs. 45.5%, Conclusion: In comparison with the propensity risk factor scores-matched controls, there was no difference in procedural complications, acute CIN or clinical outcomes during various stages of RA for CTO lesions. RA for CTO patients was highly efficient and showed safety and outcome profiles similar to those for non-CTO 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.