ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2026
Defusing a ticking time bomb: percutaneous intervention for a giant coronary pseudoaneurysm - a case report.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 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
backgroundGiant coronary pseudoaneurysms (PSAs) are extremely rare and typically managed surgically. Our case demonstrates an alternative approach with percutaneous intervention using covered stents. A 62-year-old male underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to the left main (LM) and left anterior descending (LAD) arteries for non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock in the setting of concurrent Methicillin-Sensitive Staphylococcus Aureus (MSSA) bacteraemia. During the planned staged PCI to the right coronary artery (RCA), a relook angiogram of the left coronary system revealed a giant LM-LAD PSA with evidence of coronary steal phenomenon. The staged procedure was aborted to allow for further evaluation and characterisation of the PSA. This was done through multi-modality cardiac imaging including transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA). After a HEART team discussion, it was decided that the PSA would be treated percutaneously. This was done successfully with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance and deployment of covered stents from the LM-LAD. Repeat TTE images on day 1 post procedure showed thrombi formation within the PSA cavity and the interval TTE done 3 months post procedure showed complete resolution of the PSA. The patient remained symptom free and tolerating regular dialysis sessions. He unfortunately declined repeat CTCA imaging in the interim. DISCUSSION: This showcases the importance of multi-modality imaging and a multidisciplinary approach in managing an unusual presentation of coronary PSA. The use of covered stents for treatment is feasible and allowed successful treatment of the giant PSA, avoiding potentially catastrophic complications. TAKE HOME MESSAGES: Coronary PSAs are rare and associated with fatal complications. This case highlights the successful treatment of a giant coronary PSA percutaneously using covered stents.
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.