Observational studyCatheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions2025
Intravascular Lithotripsy for Calcific Coronary Bifurcations: Procedural Success and 1-Year Clinical Outcomes.
Observational study in Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2025. 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.
- Coronary Intravascular Lithotripsy in Clinical Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Drug-Coated Balloons in Coronary Bifurcation Disease: A State-of-the-Art Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntravascular lithotripsy (IVL) has emerged as a promising treatment for heavily calcified coronary lesions. However, evidence regarding its effectiveness in calcific bifurcation lesions remains limited.
objectiveWe aimed to evaluate the technical success and 1-year clinical outcomes of IVL in calcified coronary bifurcation lesions.
methodsPatients undergoing PCI with the use of IVL from the ongoing prospective BENELUX-IVL registry were included. Participants were stratified into bifurcation and non-bifurcation groups. The primary technical endpoint was technical success, defined as successful crossing of the IVL catheter across the target lesion with a residual stenosis of < 30%. The primary safety endpoint was in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE).
resultsAmong 509 patients, 114 (22.4%) had coronary bifurcation lesions. Compared to the non-bifurcation group, the bifurcation group had higher SYNTAX scores (25 [18-33] vs. 18 [10-29]; p < 0.01), longer procedural times (100 [75-129] min vs. 78 [59-107] min; p < 0.01), and greater contrast volume use (208 ± 8 mL vs. 176 ± 4 mL; p < 0.01). Abrupt side branch occlusion (1.8%) and bail-out two-stent techniques (3.6%) were infrequent. IVL achieved comparable technical success (91.2% vs. 90.0%, p = 0.71) and 1-year MACE rates (9.6% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.20) in bifurcation versus non-bifurcation lesions.
conclusionIVL demonstrates excellent safety and efficacy in calcified coronary bifurcation PCI, achieving high technical success with low device-dependent adverse event rates.
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.