Observational studyMedicine2026
Prognostic impact of baseline left ventricular ejection fraction in patients with coronary chronic total occlusion after successful percutaneous coronary intervention or medical therapy: A prospective cohort study.
Observational study in Medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is a key determinant of prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease. However, the impact of LVEF categories on long-term outcomes in patients with coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) remains underexplored. This study aimed to evaluate the 3-year clinical outcomes in CTO patients according to LVEF category. We retrospectively analyzed 1255 patients with coronary CTO, categorized into 3 groups based on LVEF: reduced (rEF, ≤40%), mildly reduced (mrEF, 41-49%), and preserved (pEF, ≥50%). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included cardiac death (CD), non-CD, myocardial infarction, and any revascularization, including target lesion revascularization (CTO vessels), target vessel revascularization (TVR and CTO vessels), and nontarget vessel revascularization (non-TVR and non-CTO vessels). After adjustment, all-cause mortality (P = .004 and P < .001, respectively) and CD (P = .005 and P < .001, respectively) were significantly higher in the rEF group compared with the mrEF and pEF groups. The mrEF group had significantly higher rates of any revascularization (P < .001), target lesion revascularization (CTO vessel, P = .024), and TVR (CTO vessel, P = .001) than the pEF group. These findings remained consistent even when the analysis was confined to patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. In this single-center study of patients with coronary CTO, all-cause mortality was higher in the rEF group than in the mrEF and pEF groups, whereas no significant difference was observed between the mrEF and pEF groups. However, the mrEF group had a higher rate of any revascularization than the pEF group.
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.