ReviewCureus2024
Comparison of Complete Versus Incomplete Percutaneous Revascularization in Patients With Chronic Total Occlusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Residual CatLet score and its derived indexes in predicting outcomes in patients with chronic coronary syndrome after percutaneous coronary intervention.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The optimal extent of revascularization in patients with chronic total occlusion (CTO) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains debated. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of complete versus incomplete revascularization in CTO patients. A systematic search of EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science was conducted up to July 6, 2024. Studies reporting outcomes in CTO patients undergoing PCI with complete or incomplete revascularization were included. The primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular mortality. Eight studies with a total of 7,067 patients (4,854 complete and 2,213 incomplete revascularization) were included. Complete revascularization was associated with a significantly lower risk of MACE (RR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.43-0.77), all-cause mortality (RR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.37-0.78), and cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.29-0.75) compared to incomplete revascularization. There was no significant difference in the risk of recurrent myocardial infarction between the two groups (RR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.20-1.80). In patients with CTO undergoing PCI, complete revascularization is associated with significantly better clinical outcomes, including lower risks of MACE, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular mortality, compared to incomplete revascularization. These findings suggest that achieving complete revascularization should be prioritized when feasible in CTO patients.
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.