SynthesisFuture cardiology
Rotational atherectomy with cutting balloon before stenting in severely calcified coronary lesions: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Future cardiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Calcium modifying dedicated balloons: a contemporary review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Review
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
backgroundRotational atherectomy (RA) has been proven to treat coronary artery calcification (CAC) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). PURPOSE: This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of RA followed by cutting balloon angioplasty (ROTACUT) before stent placement in CAC.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies was conducted. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane were searched through January 2024. We used Stata version 17 to pool dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and continuous data using mean difference (MD), with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
resultsEight studies with 846 patients were included. There was no significant difference between ROTACUT and RA + bare balloons in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (RR:0.60; 95%CI [0.31,1.16],
conclusionROTACUT and RA + bare balloons demonstrated similar efficacy and safety profiles regarding MACE, cardiac death, TVR, TLR, procedural duration, stent thrombosis, and all safety outcomes.
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.