Shockwave vs. drill: which method best prepares calcified heart arteries for stents?

NCT ID NCT07750964

First seen Aug 06, 2026 · Last updated Aug 07, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This trial compares two procedures for treating severely calcified coronary arteries, a condition that makes stent placement difficult and risky. One method, rotational atherectomy, uses a tiny drill to grind away calcium, while the other, intravascular lithotripsy, uses sound waves to crack the calcium. The study will randomly assign about 190 patients to one of the two procedures and measure the resulting stent area to see if the newer sound-wave approach works as well as the established drilling method.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only — not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance
intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) and rotational atherectomy (RA) procedures
What this could lead to
If IVL proves as effective as RA, it could offer a safer, less damaging way to prepare calcified arteries for stents, potentially reducing complications.
What could go wrong
The trial is relatively small and early, and results may not apply to all patients. Both procedures carry risks, including vessel injury or microvascular dysfunction.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for CORONARY ARTERY CALCIFICATIONS are added.

Our safety recommendation!

By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.