Research Appraisals
Evidence-based critical appraisals of the latest medical research, systematically evaluated using Oxford CEBM methodology.
Showing 4 appraisals
The American journal of cardiology
Systematic Review of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Guidance for Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is emerging as a valuable adjunct for chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), particularly for lesions in which angiography incompletely defines procedural anatomy. In this systematic review, the authors evaluated the role of CCTA in CTO diagnosis, lesion characterization, prediction of guidewire crossing and procedural success, and procedural guidance. CCTA provides a detailed assessment of key features that directly influence CTO PCI strategy and outcomes. Randomized and observational data suggest that preprocedural CCTA can improve procedural planning, increase technical success in complex lesions, and support safer and more efficient CTO PCI through fluoroscopic co-registration and other real-time guidance applications. These findings highlight the clinical value of CCTA as a tool that can enhance case selection, optimize crossing strategy, and improve procedural success in contemporary CTO PCI.
18 July 2026
Read appraisal →The New England journal of medicine
Left Ventricular Unloading in High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
BACKGROUND: Complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with severely impaired left ventricular function carries a high risk of death and complications. Whether percutaneous left ventricular unloading improves outcomes remains unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned 300 patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction and extensive coronary artery disease in a 1:1 ratio to a strategy of elective unloading with a microaxial flow pump or to standard care during planned complex PCI. The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite that included death from any cause, disabling stroke, spontaneous myocardial infarction, hospitalization for cardiovascular causes, or periprocedural myocardial injury at a minimum of 12 months, as analyzed according to a win ratio. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients were assigned to receive a microaxial flow pump and 152 to receive standard care. At a median of 22 months (interquartile range, 16 to 30), 36.6% of pairwise comparisons favored the microaxial flow pump, and 43.0% favored standard care (win ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 1.15; difference, -6.4 percentage points; P = 0.30). Death from any cause occurred in 47 patients in the microaxial-flow-pump group and 33 in the standard-care group (hazard ratio, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.99 to 2.41). There was no material between-group difference in the risk of bleeding or vascular complications. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severely impaired left ventricular function undergoing complex PCI, elective left ventricular unloading with a microaxial flow pump did not reduce the risk of major adverse clinical outcomes at a minimum of 12 months. (Funded by the U.K. National Institute for Health and Care Research; CHIP-BCIS3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05003817.).
12 May 2026
Read appraisal →The American journal of cardiology
FFR-Guided Complete versus Culprit-Only Revascularization in Patients With Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
In patients with myocardial infarctions (MI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD), the effect of fractional flow-reserve (FFR)-guided complete revascularization during index hospitalization versus culprit-only revascularization remains unclear. Our objective is to determine whether FFR-guided complete revascularization during index hospitalization reduces major adverse cardiac events (MACE) among patients with MI and multivessel CAD. We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing FFR-guided complete versus culprit-only revascularization in patients with MI and multivessel CAD. The primary outcome was MACE, as defined by a composite endpoint of all-cause death, MI or unplanned revascularization, at a minimum 1-year follow-up. Count data were pooled across trials using random-effects models to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 3 RCTs (n = 3,054) were included. The majority (77.5%) of participants were male. The pooled RR of MACE for FFR-guide complete versus culprit-only revascularization was 0.63 (95% CI: 0.37-1.05; I2 = 90%). FFR-guided complete revascularization was associated with reduced unplanned revascularization events, with a pooled RR 0.43 (95% CI: 0.21-0.87; I2 = 88%). There was no significant difference in the risk of recurrent MI (RR: 0.9; 95% CI: 0.61-1.33; I2 =30%). The risk of major bleeding was low in both FFR-guided complete (23/1373) and culprit-only (29/1681) revascularization groups across the 3 trials. In conclusion, in patients with MI and multivessel CAD, FFR-guided complete revascularization during the index hospitalization reduces the risk of unplanned revascularizations and may reduce the risk of MACE compared to culprit-only revascularization.
16 Apr 2026
Read appraisal →Lancet (London, England)
Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting for unprotected left main stenosis: 10-year final results from the randomised, open-label, non-inferiority NOBLE trial
BACKGROUND: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is recommended over percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with significant unprotected left main coronary artery disease. We aim to provide long-term outcome data comparing PCI with newer generation drug-eluting stents and CABG, which are scarce. METHODS: This previously published, prospective, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial enrolled patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis at 36 hospitals in Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Sweden, and the UK. Eligibility was determined by a multidisciplinary heart team and defined by clinical criteria (chronic or acute coronary syndrome and a life expectancy of >1 year) and angiographic criteria (left main coronary artery diameter stenosis ≥50% or fractional flow reserve ≤0·80 in the left main ostium, mid-shaft, or bifurcation). Patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction within 24 h or considered at too high risk for CABG or PCI were excluded. Patients with angiographically confirmed significant left main coronary artery disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to PCI or CABG using an online system and stratified by site, sex, distal left main coronary artery bifurcation lesions, and diabetes. The primary outcome was the difference in 10-year all-cause mortality in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, which was analysed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and unadjusted Cox regression. Patients were censored at the date of death, emigration, withdrawal, or loss to follow-up. Variation in all-cause mortality was assessed in prespecified subgroups. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01496651 (active, not recruiting). FINDINGS: From Dec 9, 2008, to Jan 21, 2015, 1201 patients were randomly assigned to PCI (n=598) or CABG (n=603). 17 patients were lost to follow-up before 1 year. 592 patients in each group were included in the ITT population. Mean age was 66·2 years (SD 9·9) in the PCI group and 66·2 years (9·4) in the CABG group. 256 (22%) of 1184 participants were female and 928 (78%) were male. There was no difference in all-cause mortality at 10 years (136 [23%] of 592 in the PCI group and 145 [25%] of 592 in the CABG group; hazard ratio 0·93 [95% CI 0·74-1·18]; p=0·56). No significant difference in all-cause mortality with SYNTAX score was identified. INTERPRETATION: There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 10 years between PCI and CABG for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease and no additional complex lesions, indicating that PCI is equally as safe as CABG in patients eligible for both treatments. These results will aid heart teams in developing an individualised patient-centred strategy. FUNDING: Biosensors and Aarhus University Hospital.
6 Apr 2026
Read appraisal →