ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2025
A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis of the Utility of Intravascular Lithotripsy in Underexpanded Stents.
Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical expert consensus document on rotational atherectomy from the Japanese association of cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics: update 2026.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stent underexpansion is a key determinant to both short- and long-term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Current strategies available have inherent limitations in the setting of stent underexpansion, and intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) remains off-label for in-stent use. Our study aimed to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of IVL use in underexpanded stents. Methods: We undertook a retrospective analysis of PCIs involving IVL at 3 centers in New Zealand between September 2018 and November 2023. We identified cases in which IVL was utilized for both old and new in-stent lesions. The primary outcome was a 12-month major adverse cardiac events (cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization [ID-TVR]). Secondary outcomes were procedural success (<30% residual stenosis), 30-day cardiac and noncardiac death, nonfatal MI, ID-TVR, and stent thrombosis. Angiographic and intravascular imaging outcomes were also analyzed. Results: Between September 2018 and November 2023, 68 of 743 IVL cases involved in-stent lesions. Of the cases, 69% were acute coronary syndrome presentations. Twelve-month major adverse cardiac events were 8.8%. Procedural success was 87%. At 30 days, there was 1 noncardiac death but no cardiac death, nonfatal MI, ID-TVR, or stent thrombosis events. Serious complications included 2 cases of slow flow. Angiographic mean minimal lumen diameter pre-PCI was 0.89 ± 0.54 mm, post-IVL was 2.40 ± 0.60 mm, and post-stenting was 3.01 ± 0.69 mm. Intravascular imaging use was 41%; mean minimal lumen area was 3.60 ±1.78 mm Conclusions: Our multicenter retrospective analysis demonstrates that IVL is a safe and effective tool in the treatment of underexpanded stents with 12-month MACE rates comparable to those of de novo coronary lesions and a high rate of procedural success. Larger, randomized studies are required to elucidate the optimal approach for treating underexpanded stents.
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.