ArticleInterventional cardiology (London, England)2026
Conservative Management of Coronary Perforation: Lessons from the Oleander Bloom.
Article in Interventional cardiology (London, England), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This is a case report of a 62-year-old male patient who developed coronary perforation during a percutaneous coronary intervention. He presented with a non-ST-elevation MI and had a history of hypertension and hypercholesterolaemia, with an elevated BMI. Coronary angiography revealed severe calcific coronary disease within an angulated proximal left anterior descending artery. Following a heart team meeting, the consensus was for complex percutaneous coronary intervention to the left anterior descending artery, with or without left main stem involvement. Following initial balloon dilatation within the left anterior descending artery there was a clear coronary perforation. The operators could not advance a balloon past the point of perforation. It was thought that a calcific spur was preventing this. The patient suffered no acute haemodynamic compromise and there was no evidence of pericardial effusion on bedside echocardiography. After a period of observation, the operators made the decision to stop. The patient remained in the cardiac care unit on dual antiplatelet therapy for 2 weeks. The operators then brought the patient back to the laboratory and completed the case with relative ease. This case highlights the potential for conservative, non-surgical management in selected patients with contained coronary perforations, suggesting that appropriate monitoring and pharmacotherapy can mitigate the risks associated with invasive correction.
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.