ReviewThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2026
Virtual reality in percutaneous coronary intervention: from coronary imaging and procedural planning to patient care.
Review in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is one of the most frequently performed invasive procedures in medicine, yet it remains technically demanding, carries a long operator learning curve, exposes both patients and staff to ionising radiation, and is a recognised source of patient anxiety. Virtual reality (VR), which represent immersive, computer-generated environments experienced through a head-mounted display, has been proposed as a potential tool across the PCI pathway. This narrative review synthesises literature from the last five years on four domains in which VR has been applied to PCI: (1) operator training and skill acquisition; (2) patient-specific pre-procedural planning and rehearsal; (3) intraprocedural visualisation and guidance (where VR overlaps with augmented and mixed reality); and (4) patient-centred applications including periprocedural anxiety and pain management, education, and rehabilitation after myocardial infarction or revascularisation. The evidence is heterogeneous and dominated by small studies, feasibility reports, and a growing number of randomised trials in the patient-anxiety domain. Immersive VR reduces periprocedural anxiety and represents the most clinically mature application to date, although its analgesic effect is less consistent and it has not proven non-inferior to pharmacological sedation for pain; VR-based simulation can transfer skills to real catheterisation laboratory performance; and patient-specific VR can support planning in anatomically complex PCI. The principal barriers are the absence of robust haptic feedback, cost, limited validation, cybersickness, and a scarcity of outcome-driven randomised trials. VR is best understood not as a competitor to digital twins, physics-based simulation, or augmented/mixed reality, but as one complementary layer within a broader extended-reality ecosystem for coronary intervention. We outline priorities for future research, including standardised validation frameworks, integration with patient-specific digital twins, and adequately powered trials with clinical endpoints.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42530823What 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.