Trial reportCardiovascular intervention and therapeutics2025
Comparison of the incidence of slow flow following rotational atherectomy to severely calcified coronary artery lesions between short single session and long single session strategies: the randomized ROTASOLO trial.
Trial report in Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Clinical expert consensus document on rotational atherectomy from the Japanese association of cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics: update 2026.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Aortic Stenosis and Cardiogenic Shock.Circulation reports · 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
Abstract
Slow flow is the most common complication of rotational atherectomy (RA). Compared with long single sessions, short single sessions may reduce the incidence of slow flow just after RA. This study aimed to compare the incidence of slow flow just after RA between short single session and long single session strategies. This multicenter, 1:1 randomized clinical trial was conducted at 3 hospitals in Japan. The short single session strategy was defined as repeating short single sessions (up to 15 s) of RA, whereas the long single session strategy was defined as repeating long single sessions (20-30 s) until the burr crossed the target lesion. The primary outcome was slow flow just after RA, which was defined as [(initial TIMI-frame count before RA) × 1.1 minus (TIMI-frame count just after RA)] less than 0. During the study period, 266 patients were included in the final study population and were randomly assigned to the Short single session group (n = 132) or the long single session group (n = 134). The protocol adherence rate was equally high in both groups (Short single session: 98.5% versus long single session 94.8%, p = 0.172). The incidence of slow flow just after RA was similar between the 2 groups (short single session:14.4% versus long single session: 14.9%, p > 0.999). In conclusion, this randomized trial did not show a benefit of the short single session strategy compared with the long single session strategy in RA with respect to the prevention of slow flow (Unique identifier: UMIN000047231).
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.