Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 770

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical use of intracoronary imaging. Part 1: guidance and optimization of coronary interventions. An expert consensus document of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions

Open access
Räber, Lorenz, Mintz, Gary S, Koskinas, Konstantinos C, Johnson, Thomas W, Holm, Niels R, Onuma, Yoshinubo, Radu, Maria D, Joner, Michael, Yu, Bo, Jia, Haibo, Meneveau, Nicolas, de la Torre Hernandez, Jose M, Escaned, Javier, Hill, Jonathan, Prati, Francesco, Colombo, Antonio, di Mario, Carlo, Regar, Evelyn, Capodanno, Davide, Wijns, William, Byrne, Robert A, Guagliumi, Giulio, ESC Scientific Document Group, Alfonso, Fernando, Bhindi, Ravinay, Ali, Ziad, Carter, Rickey·2018·European Heart Journal

Abstract

This Consensus Document is the first of two reports summarizing the views of an expert panel organized by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) on the clinical use of intracoronary imaging including intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT). The first document appraises the role of intracoronary imaging to guide percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in clinical practice. Current evidence regarding the impact of intracoronary imaging guidance on cardiovascular outcomes is summarized, and patients or lesions most likely to derive clinical benefit from an imaging-guided intervention are identified. The relevance of the use of IVUS or OCT prior to PCI for optimizing stent sizing (stent length and diameter) and planning the procedural strategy is discussed. Regarding post-implantation imaging, the consensus group recommends key parameters that characterize an optimal PCI result and provides cut-offs to guide corrective measures and optimize the stenting result. Moreover, routine performance of intracoronary imaging in patients with stent failure (restenosis or stent thrombosis) is recommended. Finally, strengths and limitations of IVUS and OCT for guiding PCI and assessing stent failures and areas that warrant further research are critically discussed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy285

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 40 references

Cited by

See all 770

Metadata

Authors
Räber, L., Mintz, G. S., Koskinas, K. C., Johnson, T. W., Holm, N. R., Onuma, Y., Radu, M. D., Joner, M., Yu, B., Jia, H., Meneveau, N., de la Torre Hernandez, J. M., Escaned, J., Hill, J., Prati, F., Colombo, A., di Mario, C., Regar, E., Capodanno, D., Wijns, W., Byrne, R. A., Guagliumi, G., ESC Scientific Document Group, Alfonso, F., Bhindi, R., Ali, Z., & Carter, R.
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2018-05-22
Volume
39
Issue
35
Pages
3281-3300
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W2803695296
Cited by
770
References
40
FWCI
49.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical use of intracoronary imaging. Part 1: guidance and optimization of coronary interventions. An expert consensus document of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy285
The paper
Räber, L., Mintz, G. S., Koskinas, K. C., Johnson, T. W., Holm, N. R., Onuma, Y., Radu, M. D., Joner, M., Yu, B., Jia, H., Meneveau, N., de la Torre Hernandez, J. M., Escaned, J., Hill, J., Prati, F., Colombo, A., di Mario, C., Regar, E., Capodanno, D., . . . Carter, R. (2018). Clinical use of intracoronary imaging. Part 1: guidance and optimization of coronary interventions. An expert consensus document of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy285

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.