Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41676364›Full record

ReviewEuropean cardiology2026

Revascularisation in Patients with Cancer: A Review.

Miguel Nobre Menezes, Mamas A Mamas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Miguel Nobre MenezesStructural and Coronary Heart Disease Unit, Cardio-Oncology Unit, Hospital de Santa Maria, Cardiovascular Centre of the University of Lisbon (CCUL@RISE), Universidade de Lisboa Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8363-0363
Mamas A MamasKeele Cardiovascular Research Group, Centre for Prognosis Research, Keele University Keele, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9241-8890

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The emerging field of cardio-oncology has grown considerably over the past two decades. While the issue of myocardial cardiotoxicity has received the most attention, it is now recognised that cardio-oncology encompasses the full spectrum of cardiovascular disease, which includes invasive therapy as part of management. Historically, these were seldom considered in cancer patients, due to their perceived poor prognosis and high risk of complications. However, advances in diagnosis and therapy have improved the prognosis and lifespan of patients with cancer, rendering a generally conservative approach no longer appropriate. Despite this, their management remains challenging, perhaps more so than in any other subset of patients. As patients with cancer become increasingly more common in catheterisation laboratories, we review the issue of revascularisation in this patient subset to address three major issues: available evidence, appropriateness of revascularisation, and specific factors to consider when performing revascularisation.

Indexed as

antithrombotic therapycancerCardio-oncologyinterventional cardiologypercutaneous coronary intervention

Identifiers

PMID41676364
PMCPMC12888104

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.