Prognosis of coronary heart disease after percutaneous coronary intervention: a bibliometric analysis over the period 2004–2022

As the complexity and diversity of the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are being explored and reported, burgeoning research has progressed in this field. However, there is no comprehensive analysis available on PCI-related studies published in the literature. This study aimed to analyze and visualize the changes of scientific output regarding prognosis of coronary heart disease (CHD) after PCI over the past 20 years and to reveal the knowledge domain and development trends in this field by using CiteSpace software.

Relevant articles published over the period 2004–2022 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database. After manual selection, qualified documents were included and recorded with the information of their title, abstract, keyword, author, descriptor, citation, identifier, publishing year and publishing organization. We transferred the data to CiteSpace V5.8.R2 (Version 5.8.R2) to draw knowledge maps and to conduct co-occurrence analysis, cluster analysis, timeline analysis, burst term detection and citation analysis.

A total of 14,699 literature records were found relating prognosis of CHD after PCI in the past 20 years (2004–2022), including 14,212 original articles and reviews, and they were published in 153 different journals. Publication production has increased annually and a total of 1182 authors, 796 institutes and 147 countries have contributed to these publications. Moreover, the most representative author was Gregg W Stone from the CardioVascular Research Foundation (CVRF) with 368 publications, whose team mainly focused on exploring the efficacy and safety of revascularization and the characteristics of susceptible population. The global productivity ranking was led by the USA with 3326 published papers, followed by Italy (n = 1355), Japan (n = 1080), China (n = 1075) and Germany (n = 937). And the keywords of these publications were “percutaneous coronary intervention” (n = 2271), “outcome” (n = 1756), “mortality” (n = 1730) and “impact” (n = 1334). Other commonly-used words were “predictor” (n = 1324), “intervention” (n = 1310), “angioplasty” (n = 1299), “risk” (n = 1144), “acute myocardial infarction” (n = 1136) and “artery disease” (n = 1098). Cluster analysis showed that 15 high connected clusters were generated with a modularity Q of 0.831 and a weighted mean silhouette of 0.9388 by applying the log-likelihood ratio algorithm, and the top 5 clusters were #0 optical coherence tomography, #1 dual antiplatelet therapy, #2 bleeding, #3 clopidogrel and #4 thrombus aspiration. Furthermore, the frontiers in the field of prognosis of CHD after PCI mainly involved “decision making”, “reperfusion”, “angioplasty”, “balloon”, “unstable angina”, “dual antiplatelet therapy”, “cardiac surgical score”, “restenosis”, “reperfusion”, “thrombolytic therapy”, etc.

To sum up, efficacy and safety of different types of stents, the risk factors of restenosis and thrombotic events after PCI, early risk assessment, and secondary prevention and complications of patients with CHD after PCI were research hotspots and frontier topics in the area by bibliometric analysis. The results could provide a comprehensive overview of the research hotspots and frontier topics relating prognosis of CHD after PCI, promoting a better understanding of the knowledge domain and development trends in this field during the past 20 years.