Observational studyCatheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions2025
Procedural Characteristics and Safety of Slender Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Slender Is Better.
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.
- Distal radial access for complex percutaneous coronary interventions: current evidence and future perspectives.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Consensus document on the role of cardiac computed tomography for pre-procedural planning in minimally invasive percutaneous coronary intervention from the Japanese association of cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics.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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe aimed to examine the procedural characteristics and safety profile of slender percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) using a 5 Fr or smaller sheath.
backgroundSmaller catheter size has been associated with fewer complications in PCI.
methodsOur retrospective observational study included 259,401 cases of stable elective PCI from the Japan Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Registry between 2021 and 2022. Based on sheath size, cases were categorized into the slender group (5 Fr or smaller, n = 28,300) and the non-slender group (6 Fr or larger, n = 231,101).
resultsThe slender group was associated with more radial access (88.6% vs. 74.2%: p < 0.001), fewer PCI failures (1.7% vs. 2.8%, p < 0.001), shorter procedural times (86.1 ± 47.2 min vs. 103.0 ± 65.1 min, p < 0.001), lower contrast medium usage (104.0 ± 54.8 mL vs. 126.0 ± 69.0 mL, p < 0.001), and shorter fluoroscopy times (25.9 ± 20.0 min vs. 32.4 ± 26.9 min, p < 0.001). Additionally, the slender group experienced fewer complications, including procedure-related myocardial infarction (odds ratio [OR] 1.25, p = 0.004), cardiac tamponade (OR 1.52, p = 0.048), heart failure or cardiogenic shock (OR 1.57, p < 0.001), stent thrombosis (OR 2.42, p = 0.02), emergency surgery (OR 3.45, p = 0.02), and bleeding complications at both the access (OR 3.16, p < 0.001) and non-access sites (OR 1.94, p = 0.02). Although the in-hospital mortality rate was slightly lower in the slender group, this difference was not statistically significant (OR 1.11, p = 0.39).
conclusionsSlender PCI using a 5 Fr or smaller sheath was associated with a favorable safety profile, shorter procedural times, and fewer complications compared to larger sheath sizes.
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.