Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42534366›Full record

ReviewReviews in cardiovascular medicine2026

Management of Undeflatable Coronary Balloons During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Case-Based Review and Practical Bailout Algorithm.

Allam Harfoush, Tammam Harfouch, Muntasir Abo-Al-Hayja, Khaled Albouaini, Ammar Ezeldin, Hanady Hamdallah, Abdalazeem Ibrahem

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reviews 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.

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

7 authors.

Allam HarfoushCardiology Department, North Bristol NHS Trust, BS10 5NB Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7317-4237
Tammam HarfouchCardiothoracic Surgery, Radiology, and Cardiac Imaging Department, Saint Spiridon County Hospital, 700111 Iasi, Romania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8734-011X
Muntasir Abo-Al-HayjaCardiology Department, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, L7 8YE Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9638-3015
Khaled AlbouainiCardiology Department, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, L7 8YE Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1611-4702
Ammar EzeldinGeneral Medicinem, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, NE9 6SX Newcastle Upon Tyne, Gateshead, UK.
Hanady HamdallahDepartment of Primary Care & Population Health, University College London, WC1E 6BT London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6314-0236
Abdalazeem IbrahemCardiology Department, North Bristol NHS Trust, BS10 5NB Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2688-6295

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Undeflatable coronary balloons during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are rare but particularly hazardous because persistent intracoronary inflation can cause abrupt coronary occlusion, ischaemia, and haemodynamic collapse. We aimed to synthesise the published experience to define mechanistic patterns, identify recurring predisposing factors, and propose a practical bailout algorithm. Methods and Results: We performed a case-based review of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EBSCO from inception to February 2026. Eligible reports described balloons that could not be deflated while positioned in a coronary artery. A total of 15 coronary cases (2011-2025) met the inclusion criteria. Events occurred most often during post-dilatation or after stent deployment in complex anatomy, frequently involving severe calcification, aorto-ostial segments, chronic total occlusion-like lesions, and settings with limited guide engagement. Mechanistic patterns clustered into (i) intact-system non-deflation, where restoration of an exit pathway (system checks, sustained negative suction, and contrast dilution), followed by controlled decompression (wire puncture or mechanical- or energy-assisted disruption), was feasible; (ii) shaft-compromised events (fracture or detachment), where management shifted from decompression to mechanical retrieval, with surgery reserved for percutaneous failure. Conclusion: Undeflatable coronary balloons represent distinct failure modes with different viable rescue options. Outcomes appear to be driven by rapid restoration of perfusion and early recognition of shaft integrity. A structured escalation approach prioritising stabilisation, low-risk troubleshooting, controlled decompression, and decisive transition to retrieval, exclusion, or surgery when decompression is impossible could reduce secondary iatrogenic harm.

Indexed as

algorithmsballoon angioplastycardiac catheterisationcoronary artery diseasedevice removalequipment failurepercutaneous coronary intervention

Identifiers

PMID42534366
PMCPMC13419944

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.