Meta-Analysis of PCI Guidance Strategies Across 50 Randomized Studies

A network meta-analysis of 50 randomized studies involving 39,863 patients compares the effectiveness of angiography-, physiology-, and imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). It reports outcomes including major adverse cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, and stent thrombosis, with patient counts for each guidance modality.

Use Cases

• Compare major adverse cardiovascular event rates between angiography-guided and IVUS-guided PCI using the reported risk ratios.
• Analyze the relative risk for all-cause mortality associated with iFR-guided PCI versus IVUS-guided PCI.
• Rank PCI guidance strategies using the SUCRA values implied by the network meta-analysis results.
• Examine the reported patient counts (e.g., 15,463 angiography, 10,728 IVUS) to assess study population distribution across modalities.

Strengths

• Analysis is based on 50 randomized controlled trials, a substantial evidence base.
• Includes data from 39,863 total patients, with gender breakdown provided (29,571 male, 10,031 female).
• Reports specific patient counts for each PCI guidance strategy (e.g., 10,728 IVUS-guided, 3,849 OCT-guided).

Limitations

• The underlying dataset is not provided; only the analysis summary in a 22.0 KB DOCX file is available.
• No raw patient-level or study-level data columns are accessible for independent analysis.
• The analysis synthesizes existing studies, which may inherit their individual limitations and biases.

Provenance

Source

figshare, author Yuancheng Jin.

Collection Method

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of 50 randomized studies.

Freshness

Last updated 2026-03-20.