ArticleScientific reports2025
Simulation and experimental study on processing behavior of coronary artery calcified tissue removal.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Coronary artery atherosclerosis is a prevalent cardiovascular disease and a leading cause of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Rotational atherectomy (RA) is an effective interventional technique for treating severe calcified stenosis. However, excessive forces, heat, and debris are prone to lead to serious surgical complications, such as slow flow/no-reflow and blood clots. To mitigate excessive force and heat generation during RA, a novel high-performance cutting tool was designed and fabricated for coronary artery calcified tissue removal. An RA simulation model was developed to simulate the procedure. The results showed that the forces, temperatures, and debris size remained within predefined safety thresholds. Using the 1.5 mm tool as an illustration, the peak cutting force was 1.062 N, and the peak temperature rise reached 1.170 °C. Debris distribution exhibited a normal pattern, with 90% of particles measuring below 14 μm. The experimental results closely matched the simulation values, showcasing errors under 10% and affirming the simulation model's precision. This research provides theoretical support for the study of mechanisms and contributes to optimizing the effectiveness of RA.
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.