ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024
Application of optical coherence tomography in cardiovascular diseases: bibliometric and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reference Power Optimization for Common-Path Probes in Optical Coherence Tomography.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Digital twins and digital models of the human circulatory system.Nature reviews bioengineering · 2026Article
- Light and metabolism: label-free optical imaging of metabolic activities in biological systems [Invited].Biomedical optics express · 2025Review
- Nonmechanical spectral domain optical coherence tomography using an electrowetting beam-scanner.Optics express · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Significance: Since the advent of Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) two decades ago, there has been substantial advancement in our understanding of intravascular biology. Identifying culprit lesion pathology through OCT could precipitate a paradigm shift in the treatment of patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome. Given the technical prowess of OCT in the realm of cardiology, bibliometric analysis can reveal trends and research focal points in the application of OCT for cardiovascular diseases. Concurrently, meta-analyses provide a more comprehensive evidentiary base, supporting the clinical efficacy of OCT-guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI). Design: This study employs a dual approach of Bibliometric and Meta-analysis. Methods: Relevant literature from 2003 to 2023 was extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) and analyzed using VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and R for publication patterns, countries, institutions, authors, and research hotspots. The study compares OCT-guided and coronary angiography-guided PCI in treating adult coronary artery disease through randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. The study has been reported in the line with PRISMA and AMSTAR Guidelines. Results: Adhering to inclusion and exclusion criteria, 310 publications were incorporated, demonstrating a continual rise in annual output. Chinese researchers contributed the most studies, while American research wielded greater influence. Analysis of trends indicated that research on OCT and angiography-guided PCI has become a focal topic in recent cohort studies and RCTs. In 11 RCTs ( Conclusion: Our comprehensive review of OCT in cardiovascular disease literature from 2004 to 2023, encompassing country and institutional origins, authors, and publishing journals, suggests that OCT-guided PCI does not demonstrate significant clinical benefits in RCTs. Nevertheless, pooled results from observational studies indicate a reduction in MACE and TLR.
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.