Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39493943›Full record

ReviewUS cardiology2023

Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization.

Abdulrahman Almoghairi, Nayef Al-Asiri, Khalid Aljohani, Ayman AlSaleh, Nasser G Alqahtani, Mohammed Alasmary, Rudaynah Alali, Khaled Tamam, Mirvat Alasnag

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in US cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors.

Abdulrahman AlmoghairiAdult Cardiology Department, Prince Sultan Cardiac Center Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Nayef Al-AsiriCardiac Center, Mouwasat Hospital Jubail Industrial City, Saudi Arabia.
Khalid AljohaniDepartment of Cardiac Sciences, King Fahad Cardiac Center, College of Medicine King Saudi University Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Ayman AlSalehDepartment of Cardiac Sciences, King Fahad Cardiac Center, College of Medicine King Saudi University Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Nasser G AlqahtaniDepartment of Internal Medicine, Cardiology Section, College of Medicine, King Khalid University Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Mohammed AlasmaryNajran University, Medical College Najran, Saudi Arabia.
Rudaynah AlaliDepartment of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
Khaled TamamInternational Medical Center Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Mirvat AlasnagCardiac Center, King Fahd Armed Forces Hospital Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Left main (LM) coronary artery disease accounts for approximately 4-6% of all percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). There has been mounting evidence indicating the non-inferiority of LM PCI as a revascularization option, particularly for those with a low SYNTAX score. The EXCEL and NOBEL trials have shaped current guidelines. The European Society of Cardiology assigned a class 2a (level of evidence B) for isolated LM disease involving the shaft and ostium and a class IIb (level of evidence B) for isolated LM disease involving the bifurcation or additional two- or three-vessel disease and a SYNTAX score <32. However, data on the use of a single stent or an upfront two-stent strategy for distal LM disease are conflicting, wherein the EBC Main trial reported similar outcomes with a stepwise provisional approach and the DKCRUSH-V trial reported better outcomes with an upfront two-stent strategy using the 'double-kissing' crush technique. Although several studies have noted better immediate results with image-guided PCI, there are few data on outcomes in LM disease specifically. In fact, the uptake of imaging in the aforementioned landmark trials was only 40%. More importantly, the role of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has been less well studied in LM PCI. Indiscriminate use of MCS for LM PCI has been noted in clinical practice. Trials evaluating the benefit of MCS in high-risk PCI demonstrated no benefit. This review highlights contemporary trials as they apply to current practice in LM PCI.

Indexed as

intracoronary imagingLeft mainmechanical circulatory supportrevascularization

Identifiers

PMID39493943
PMCPMC11526480

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.