ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025
Intravascular lithotripsy for the treatment of calcified coronary lesions in individuals of advanced age: a post-hoc analysis of the multicentre, prospective BENELUX-IVL study.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06577038 (Prospective, International, Multicenter, All-comers Registry for the Study of Intravascular Lithotripsy in Coronary Interventions), which is not on this 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.
Prospective, International, Multicenter, All-comers Registry for the Study of Intravascular Lithotripsy in Coronary Interventions
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy and safety of the SoniCracker intravascular lithotripsy device for severely calcified coronary lesions: the LEAD-FIM study from China.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Trial
- A patient-tailored percutaneous coronary intervention of calcified lesions using different intravascular lithotripsy modalities in a multimorbid nonagenarian patient presenting with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients of advanced age are frequently underrepresented or excluded from major clinical trials, leading to limited evidence in this population and a reliance on data extrapolated from younger populations. The present study aims to compare and evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) for the treatment of calcified coronary lesions in individuals of advanced age and in younger populations. Methods: In this post-hoc analysis, from the ongoing prospective, multicenter BENELUX-IVL registry involving nine hospitals across four countries in the European Union, patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) were retrospectively stratified into two groups: advanced age (≥80 years) and younger (<80 years). The primary technical endpoint was technical success, defined as successful IVL catheter crossing of the target lesion with residual stenosis <30%. The primary safety endpoint was in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT06577038. Findings: Between January 2019 and April 2025, 583 patients underwent PCI with IVL; of these, 147 (25.2%) patients were aged ≥80 years (advanced age cohort), and the remaining 436 (74.8%) were aged <80 years (younger cohort). Compared to younger patients, the advanced age cohort had higher SYNTAX score (23 [IQR 15-32] vs. 18 [IQR 11-28], p = 0.01) and more comorbidities. Intraprocedural complications (severe dissection, abrupt vessel closure, and perforation) were low in both groups, with no significant differences between them. Technical success was comparable between the advanced age and younger populations (87.8% vs. 90.6%, RR: 0.97 (0.91-1.04), p = 0.32). In-hospital MACE rates were similar between the advanced age and younger cohorts (1.4% vs. 2.1%, RR: 0.64 (0.19-2.18), p = 0.59), and these results remained consistent at 1-year follow-up (6.1% vs. 8.0%, RR: 0.76 (0.38-1.55) p = 0.51). Interpretation: In patients of advanced age, IVL for calcified coronary lesions demonstrates a favorable safety and efficacy profile, with high technical success and low rates of device-related adverse events. Nonetheless, larger studies with extended follow-up are warranted to confirm these findings and establish long-term outcomes. Funding: This work was funded through a research grant from Shockwave Medical.
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.