ReviewIndian heart journal
Robotic percutaneous coronary intervention (R-PCI): Time to focus on the pros and cons.
Review in Indian heart journal. 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.
- Evaluating Patients' Profiles and Procedural Outcomes of Robotically Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Single Centre Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- AI-Driven Robotic PCI: A Perception-to-Action Framework for Coronary Guidewire Control.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Radiation-Free Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Myth or Reality?Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Robot-Assisted Cardiovascular Interventions.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Review
- Robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention: experience in Switzerland.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess the safety, efficiency, and device compatibility of the Second Generation Robotic System.
methodsData on Robot-Assisted PCI (R-PCI) is frequently insufficient in India. Many articles were published in national, non-indexed journals that are not available online and are difficult to obtain. Recognizing these constraints, the current review is intended to compile the available data on this important new innovation technique. This review could encourage future research and serve as a valuable source of information. RESULTS/
conclusionIn terms of procedure efficiency, operator radiation reduction, and safety, the recent implementation and development of second-generation robotic systems have had a significant impact on interventional cardiology. This technology will play a significant role in the future of interventional cardiology as advancements eliminate the need for manual assistance, improve devices compatibility, and expand the use of robotics for telestenting procedures. A larger study demonstrating the safety and feasibility of tele-stenting over greater geographic distances, as well as addressing fundamental technical difficulties, would be required before attempting R-PCI.
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.