Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37890892›Full record

ReviewOpen heart2023

Why percutaneous revascularisation might not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and mortality in patients with stable CAD?

Stefano Benenati, Giovanni Luigi De Maria, Rafail Kotronias, Italo Porto, Adrian P Banning

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Open heart, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Beyond the Lumen: Molecular Imaging to Unmask Vulnerable Coronary Plaques.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025
    Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Stefano BenenatiCardiovascular Disease Chair, Department of Internal Medicine (Di.M.I.), University of Genova, Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9669-4278
Giovanni Luigi De MariaOxford Heart Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK.
Rafail KotroniasOxford Heart Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK.
Italo PortoCardiovascular Disease Chair, Department of Internal Medicine (Di.M.I.), University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Adrian P BanningOxford Heart Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK Adrian.Banning@ouh.nhs.uk.
John Radcliffe Hospital · GBOspedale Policlinico San Martino · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is widely adopted to treat chronic coronary artery disease. Numerous randomised trials have been conducted to test whether PCI may provide any prognostic advantage over oral medical therapy (OMT) alone, without definitive results. This has maintained the paradigm of OMT as the first-line standard of care for patients, reserving PCI for symptom control. In this review, we discuss the current evidence in favour and against PCI in stable coronary syndromes and highlight the pitfalls of the available studies. We offer a critical appraisal of the possible reasons why the existing data does not provide evidence supporting the role of PCI in improving clinical outcomes in patients with stable coronary syndromes.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseMyocardial InfarctionMyocardial IschemiaPercutaneous Coronary InterventionHumansTreatment OutcomeCORONARY ARTERY DISEASEPercutaneous Coronary InterventionSTABLE ANGINA

Identifiers

PMID37890892
PMCPMC10619108
OpenAlexW4387978603

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.