SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2024
Optical coherence tomography (OCT) - versus angiography-guided strategy for percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Intravascular Imaging Versus Physiology Assessment for Intermediate Lesions During PCI.Biomedicines · 2026Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOptical coherence tomography (OCT) guidance in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been shown to improve procedural outcomes. However, evidence supporting its superiority over angiography-guided PCI in terms of clinical outcomes is still emerging and limited. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of OCT-guided PCI versus angiography-guided PCI in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).
methodsA systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical outcomes of OCT-guided and angiography-guided PCI in patients with CAD. Clinical endpoints including all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were assessed.
resultsEleven RCTs, comprising 2,699 patients in the OCT-guided group and 2,968 patients in the angiography-guided group met inclusion criteria. OCT-guided PCI was associated with significantly lower rates of cardiovascular death(RR 0.56; 95%CI: 0.32-0.98; p = 0.04; I
conclusionsAmong patients undergoing PCI, OCT-guided PCI was associated with lower incidences of cardiovascular death, stent thrombosis and MACE compared to angiography-guided PCI.
trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD42023484342.
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.