Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40191879›Full record

ReviewEuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology2025

Percutaneous coronary intervention for calcified and resistant lesions.

Gabriele Pesarini, Farrel Hellig, Ashok Seth, Richard Alan Shlofmitz, Flavio Luciano Ribichini

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Network meta-analysis of treatment strategies for calcified coronary lesions.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Calcium modifying dedicated balloons: a contemporary review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors.

Gabriele PesariniDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Farrel HelligNetcare Sunninghill Hospital, Sandton, South Africa.
Ashok SethFortis Escorts Heart Institute, New Delhi, India.
Richard Alan ShlofmitzSt Francis Hospital, Roslyn, NY, USA.
Flavio Luciano RibichiniDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Relevant calcified coronary artery disease (CCAD) may be present in around 20% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions, and it is known to add procedural challenges and risks. Careful patient selection and specific expertise in multimodality imaging and plaque modification techniques are required to plan and adopt the most appropriate therapeutic strategy. This review aims to present the contemporary clinical approach and procedural planning for CCAD patients, describing the available tools and strategies in view of the most recent scientific evidence.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseasePercutaneous Coronary InterventionVascular CalcificationHumansPatient SelectionTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID40191879
PMCPMC11956026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.