ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Comparative effectiveness and outcomes of physiology- and imaging-guided PCI: an evidence synthesis and network meta-analysis of FFR, iFR, OCT, and IVUS.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Multiple coronary guidance strategies including angiography, physiology-based assessment, and intracoronary imaging are used to optimize percutaneous coronary intervention, yet their comparative effectiveness across clinical outcomes remains uncertain. Methods: A comprehensive network meta-analysis incorporated fifty randomized studies evaluating angiography, FFR, iFR, IVUS, and OCT. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, and target vessel revascularization. Random effects models were applied and interventions were ranked using SUCRA. Results: A total of 50 studies involving 39,863 patients were included, of whom 29,571 were male and 10,031 were female. Across guidance modalities, 15,463 patients underwent angiography-guided PCI, 10,728 IVUS-guided, 6,001 FFR-guided, 3,512 iFR-guided, and 3,849 OCT-guided PCI. In the network meta-analysis, intravascular imaging strategies demonstrated favorable outcomes across evaluated endpoints. Compared with IVUS, angiography-guided PCI was associated with higher rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.13-1.46), all-cause mortality (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.98-1.63), myocardial infarction (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.28-2.40), target lesion failure (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.19-1.93), and stent thrombosis (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.25-2.70). Physiology-guided PCI using iFR was associated with higher risk estimates for all-cause mortality (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.06-2.79) and cardiac death (RR 2.21, 95% CI 1.24-4.24) compared with IVUS. OCT demonstrated outcomes comparable to IVUS, with no statistically significant differences in major adverse cardiovascular events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80-1.28) or cardiac death (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.47-1.59). Sensitivity analyses yielded similar estimates. Overall, probabilistic ranking analyses favored intravascular imaging strategies, although effect estimates among non-angiographic modalities overlapped. Conclusions: Advanced PCI guidance strategies using intravascular imaging or invasive physiological assessment are associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with angiography alone. However, no single non-angiographic modality demonstrates definitive superiority, supporting individualized selection of guidance strategies based on clinical and procedural context. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251238909, identifier CRD420251238909.
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.