ReviewTherapeutic advances in cardiovascular disease
Coronary intravascular lithotripsy in contemporary practice: challenges and opportunities in coronary intervention.
Review in Therapeutic advances in cardiovascular disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Safety and feasibility of rotational atherectomy in chronic total occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Management of under-expansion stent using intravascular lithotripsy under OCT guidance: a case report and systematic review.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Coronary Intravascular Lithotripsy in Clinical Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Clinical Outcomes of Intravascular Lithotripsy for Severely Calcified Coronary Lesions: A Single-Center Study.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 2026Article
- Novel Hertz Contact Intravascular Lithotripsy: Could We Achieve More in Balloon-Based Calcium Modification?Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- In-hospital outcomes of intravascular lithotripsy compared to rotational atherectomy and cutting/scoring balloon angioplasty.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- A review of the pathogenic mechanism and clinical management progress of in-stent calcification restenosis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Beyond the Learning Curve: Integrating Coronary Intravascular Lithotripsy into Contemporary Calcium Modification.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2026Article
- Ultrasound-driven atherosclerosis nanomedicine: from mechanical, cavitation, and sonodynamic therapies to bedside translation.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2025Review
- Use of Calcium Modification in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Intravascular Lithotripsy for Calcific Coronary Bifurcations: Procedural Success and 1-Year Clinical Outcomes.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025Observational
- Intravascular ultrasound assessment of stent edge restenosis mechanisms and treatment outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Advantages of hybrid intravascular ultrasound-optical coherence tomography system in clinical practice.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Intravascular lithotripsy vs. rotational atherectomy on coronary microcirculation: a retrospective multicenter propensity-matched multicenter study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Coronary intravascular lithotripsy: the tombstone of coronary calcium.Future cardiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of calcified coronary arteries is associated with poor outcomes. Poorly modified calcified lesion hinders the stent delivery, disrupts drug-carrying polymer, impairs drug elution kinetics and results in under-expanded stent (UES). UES is the most common cause of acute stent thrombosis and in-stent restenosis after PCI of calcified lesions. Angiography has poor sensitivity for recognition and quantification of coronary calcium, thereby mandating the use of intravascular imaging. Intravascular imaging, like intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography, has the potential to accurately identify and quantify the coronary calcium and to guide appropriate modification device before stent placement. Available options for the modification of calcified plaque include modified balloons (cutting balloon, scoring balloon and high-pressure balloon), atherectomy devices (rotational atherectomy and orbital atherectomy) and laser atherectomy. Coronary intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) is the newest addition to the tool box for calcified plaque modification. It produces the acoustic shockwaves, which interact with the coronary calcium to cause multiplanar fractures. These calcium fractures increase the vessel compliance and result in desirable minimum stent areas. Coronary IVL has established its safety and efficacy for calcified lesion in series of Disrupt CAD trials. Its advantages over atherectomy devices include ease of use on workhorse wire, ability to modify deep calcium, no debris embolization causing slow flow or no-flow and minimal thermal injury. It is showing promising results in modification of difficult calcified lesion subsets such as calcified nodule, calcified left main bifurcation lesions and chronic total occlusion. In this review, authors will summarize the mechanism of action for IVL, its role in contemporary practice, evidence available for its use, its advantages over atherectomy devices and its imaging insight in different calcified lesion scenarios.
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.