Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42368218›Full record

ArticleEuropean heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology2026

Patient selection for complex, high-risk indicated percutaneous coronary intervention procedures: an overview.

Vasileios Panoulas, Ovidio De Filippo, Matthias Bossard, Jürgen Leick, Jerzy Sacha, Mario Iannaccone, Arpad Lux, Guido Tavazzi, Nilesh Pareek, Roberto Lorusso and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Vasileios PanoulasHarefield Hospital, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, part of Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Hill End Road, UB9 6JH, Harefield, London, UK.
Ovidio De FilippoDivision of Cardiology, Cardiovascular and Thoracic Department, Città della Salute e della Scienza (AOU), Corso Bramante 88/90, 10126 Turin, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4915-9501
Matthias BossardHeart Centre, Luzerner Kantonsspital, University Research and Teaching Hospital, Spitalstrasse 16, 6000 Luzern, Switzerland.
Jürgen LeickHeart Centre Trier, Hospital of the Brothers of Mercy, Nordallee 1, 54292 Trier, Germany.
Jerzy SachaDepartment of Cardiology, University Clinical Hospital in Opole, Al. Witosa 26, 45-401 Opole, Poland.
Mario IannacconeDepartment of Cardiology, Turin Nord Emergency Hospital, Piazza Donatori di Sangue 3, 10100 Torino TO, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0571-3918
Arpad LuxDepartment of Cardiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, 6229 HX Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Guido TavazziDepartment of Clinical-Surgical, Diagnostic, and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Viale Golgi 19, 27100 Pavia, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9560-5138
Nilesh PareekKing's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London SE5 8AF, UK.
Roberto LorussoCardio-Thoracic Surgery Department, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, 6620 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1777-2045
Nikos WernerHeart Centre Trier, Hospital of the Brothers of Mercy, Nordallee 1, 54292 Trier, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has evolved substantially over recent decades, enabling treatment of increasingly complex coronary anatomy through major technological advances, including enhanced stent platforms, intracoronary imaging, plaque modification devices, and mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Despite these developments, coronary artery bypass grafting often remains the guideline-preferred strategy for patients with complex and prognostically significant coronary artery disease. However, patients with complex and advanced coronary artery disease are often older and burdened by greater comorbidity than those enrolled in randomized clinical trials, rendering many patients poor surgical candidates, and prompting preference for less invasive therapies to preserve quality of life. This shift has driven the emergence of complex, high-risk indicated PCI (CHIP) and protected PCI as alternative treatment strategies. CHIP encompasses both anatomical complexity and heightened procedural risk related to haemodynamic compromise and patient comorbidities. As randomized trials capture only a small subset of real-world patients and are often subject to selection bias, current practice relies heavily on observational data-derived largely from registries, expert consensus, and institutional experience-to guide selection of patients most likely to benefit from MCS support. This review synthesizes available contemporary evidence and consensus frameworks to delineate the multifactorial nature of CHIP risk, organizing key determinants into four categories: complex coronary anatomy, impaired haemodynamics, cardiac comorbidities, and non-cardiac comorbidities. Understanding how these factors influence procedural risk, patient selection, and therapeutic benefit is essential to decision-making and optimization of outcomes in this vulnerable population.

Indexed as

CHIPMechanical circulatory supportPatient selectionPercutaneous coronary intervention

Identifiers

PMID42368218
PMCPMC13294556

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.