Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42687084›Full record

ArticleCardiovascular intervention and therapeutics2026

Effectiveness and safety of coronary Laser in UnDIlatable or unCrOssable lesions: The LUDICO study.

Alfonso Jurado-Roman, Jon Zubiaur, Mattia Basile, Guillermo Galeote, Santiago Jiménez-Valero, Javier Suárez de Lezo, Francisco Hidalgo, Ignacio Gallo Fernández, Soledad Ojeda, Ana Belen Cid-Alvarez and 14 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics, 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

24 authors.

Alfonso Jurado-RomanDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Paseo de la Castellana 261, Madrid, 28046, Spain.
Jon ZubiaurDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Paseo de la Castellana 261, Madrid, 28046, Spain. jonzubiaur5@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4744-4306
Mattia BasileDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Paseo de la Castellana 261, Madrid, 28046, Spain.
Guillermo GaleoteDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Paseo de la Castellana 261, Madrid, 28046, Spain.
Santiago Jiménez-ValeroDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Paseo de la Castellana 261, Madrid, 28046, Spain.
Javier Suárez de LezoCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, España.
Francisco HidalgoCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, España.
Ignacio Gallo FernándezCardiology, Reina Sofia Hospital, University of Córdoba, Maimonides Institute for Research in Biomedicine of Córdoba (IMIBIC), Córdoba, Spain.
Soledad OjedaCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, España.
Ana Belen Cid-AlvarezCardiology, Hospital Universitario Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Coruña, Spain.
Neus BelleraCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, España.
Bruno García Del BlancoCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, España.
Gema MiñanaCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, España.
Jeremías BayónCardiology, Hospital Universitario Lucus Augusti (HULA), Lugo, España.
José ValenciaCardiology, Dr. Balmis General University Hospital, Alicante Institute for Health and Biomedical Research (ISABIAL), Alicante, Spain.
Ignacio J Amat-SantosCardiology, Hospital Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.
Eduardo PinarCardiology, Virgen de la Arrixaca University Hospital, El Palmar, Spain.
Georgina Fuertes FerreCardiology, Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, España.
Antonio Gómez-MencheroCardiology, Hospital Universitario Juan Ramón Jiménez, Huelva, España.
Manuel López PérezCardiology, University Hospital San Cecilio, Granada, Spain.
Javier EscanedCardiology, University Hospital San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
Borja Rivero SantanaDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Paseo de la Castellana 261, Madrid, 28046, Spain.
Daniel TebarDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Paseo de la Castellana 261, Madrid, 28046, Spain.
Raúl MorenoDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Paseo de la Castellana 261, Madrid, 28046, Spain.

Funding

Biomenco Biomenco
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Excimer laser coronary atherectomy (ELCA) is increasingly used in complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In balloon-failure scenarios (uncrossable [UCL] and undilatable lesions [UDL]) uniform procedural endpoints have been applied despite their different mechanisms of failure. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ELCA in balloon-failure lesions using lesion-specific endpoints. Prospective, multicentre, single-arm observational study including patients undergoing PCI for UCL, UDL, or combined balloon-failure lesions (CBFL [UCL + UDL]) treated with ELCA. UDL was defined as < 80% expansion with a non-compliant balloon at burst pressure; UCL as inability to cross with a < 1.5 mm balloon despite successful wiring and adequate support. Intracoronary imaging was recommended and analysed in a central core laboratory. Lesion specific ELCA success, procedural success, imaging-based success, complications, and 1-year outcomes were assessed. 254 lesions (230 patients) were included. Lesions were classified as UCL (n = 109), UDL (n = 99), or CBFL (n = 46). Most UDL were in-stent lesions (38.4%), whereas UCL were chronic total occlusions (20.2%). Intracoronary imaging was used in 44.4%. ELCA success was 83.9%, with a trend toward lower success in CBFL (UCL 88.1%, UDL 83.8%, CBFL 73.9% p = 0.09). Procedural success was similar between groups (UCL 81.6%, UDL 81.2%, CBFL 84.8% p = 0.9). Imaging-based success rate was 88.1% (52/59 evaluable lesions). Additional plaque modification was required in 13.4%. Severe ELCA-related complications were 1.9%, all successfully managed. An initial ELCA-based approach is safe and effective for the treatment of selected balloon-failure lesions. CBFL represents the most complex subset showing a trend toward lower ELCA success and frequently requiring additional plaque-modification techniques.

Indexed as

Complex coronary interventionExcimer laser coronary atherectomyPercutaneous coronary intervention

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.