ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026
In-hospital outcomes of intravascular lithotripsy compared to rotational atherectomy and cutting/scoring balloon angioplasty.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntravascular lithotripsy (IVL) emerged for the treatment of coronary artery calcification with encouraging safety and effectiveness rates in previous trials. Knowledge about the in-hospital safety of IVL in comparison to frequently used plaque modification techniques remains limited.
objectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the in-hospital outcomes of IVL in comparison to rotational atherectomy (RA) and cutting/scoring balloons (C/S).
methodsA total of 51,921 isolated PCI procedures of patients who underwent planned coronary angiography with IVL, RA or C/S between 2019 and 2023 were extracted from a German nationwide registry. Analyses of the average treatment effect were carried out employing a double-robust estimator using machine learning algorithms.
resultsCompared to IVL, adjusted procedural relative risk of in-hospital mortality was significantly higher for RA (RR 1.72; 95% CI: 1.24 - 2.38, p = 0.001) and C/S (RR 1.50; 95% CI: 1.08 - 2.08, p = 0.015), while safety parameters such as stroke, severe bleeding and acute kidney injury were comparable. The adjusted risk of shock (RR 1.57; 95% CI: 1.20 - 2.04, p = 0.001) and pericardial drainage (RR 1.95; 95% CI: 1.23 - 3.07, p = 0.004) was lower for IVL compared to RA but not to C/S. Further, IVL use was associated with a shorter adjusted length of hospitalization compared to RA (- 0.75 days, p < 0.001) and C/S (- 0.22 days, p = 0.047).
conclusionIVL is associated with a favorable safety profile compared to RA and C/S and a more timely discharge of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41603942What 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.