Gihong Choi
Sungkyunkwan University · Medicine
About the Lab
Professor Gihong Choi's research lab specializes in interventional cardiology and structural heart disease, with a strong focus on mechanical circulatory support, peripheral arterial disease, and acute coronary syndromes. The lab investigates clinical outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with cardiogenic shock, particularly in the context of acute myocardial infarction and left ventricular assist device therapy. Key research directions include optimizing percutaneous interventions—such as stenting in bifurcation and peripheral artery disease—using advanced hemodynamic scoring systems and personalized treatment strategies.
Research Overview
Research Output Trend
Figures are computed from collected data and may differ slightly.
Selected Papers
15Early initiation of VA-ECMO before revascularization therapy might improve clinical outcomes in patients with AMI complicated by refractory CS.
Background With advances in peripheral artery disease ( PAD ) treatments such as endovascular treatment ( EVT ), personalized patient assessment is important. Data on sex differences in clinical outcome for PAD patients undergoing EVT have been limited, and studies have produced conflicting results. This study sought to compare midterm clinical outcomes between women and men in a large population of patients with PAD undergoing EVT . Methods and Results The K- VIS ELLA (Korean Vascular Intervent
Background: In the current era of mechanical circulatory support, limited data are available on prognosis of cardiogenic shock (CS) caused by various diseases. We investigated the characteristics and predictors of in-hospital mortality in Korean patients with CS. Methods: The RESCUE study (Retrospective and Prospective Observational Study to Investigate Clinical Outcomes and Efficacy of Left Ventricular Assist Device for Korean Patients With CS) is a multicenter, retrospective, and prospective r
OBJECTIVES: To identify whether the prognostic implications of Vasoactive Inotropic Score according to use of mechanical circulatory support differ in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. DESIGN: A multicenter retrospective and prospective observational cohort study. SETTING/PATIENT: The REtrospective and prospective observational Study to investigate Clinical oUtcomes and Efficacy registry includes 1,247 patients with cardiogenic shock from 12 centers i
Objective There are conflicting results among previous studies regarding the prognosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) compared with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This study aimed to compare the outcomes of patients with de novo acute heart failure (AHF) or acute decompensated HF (ADHF) according to HFpEF (EF≥50%), or HFrEF (EF<40%) and to define the prognosis of patients with HF with mid-range EF (HFmrEF, 40≤EF<50%). Methods Between March
Background: Although 1-stent with provisional approach is the preferred strategy for the treatment of bifurcation lesions, the optimal treatment strategy according to lesion location is still debatable. This study aimed to identify whether clinical outcomes according to treatment strategy differed between left main (LM) and non-LM bifurcation lesions in the second-generation drug-eluting stent era. Methods: The Coronary Bifurcation Stenting registry III is a retrospective multicenter registry of
Background: Although the current guidelines endorse the PRECISE-DAPT score (Predicting Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) to inform clinical decisions regarding duration of DAPT in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, use of the PRECISE-DAPT score to guide duration of DAPT has not been properly validated by randomized trials focused on the population with acute coronary syndrome. This study aimed to evalua
Importance: Invasive physiologic indices such as fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) are used in clinical practice. Nevertheless, comparative prognostic outcomes of iFR-guided and FFR-guided treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes have not yet been fully investigated. Objective: To compare 1-year clinical outcomes of iFR-guided or FFR-guided treatment in patients with and without diabetes in the Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate Stenosis to Guide R
Background Although current guidelines now define heart failure with midrange ejection fraction ( HF mr EF ) as HF with a left ventricular EF of 40% to 49%, there are limited data on response to guideline-directed medical therapy in patients with HF mr EF . The current study aimed to evaluate the association between β-blocker, renin-angiotensin system blocker ( RASB ), or aldosterone antagonist ( AA ) treatment with clinical outcome in patients with HF mr EF . Methods and Results We performed a
Research Areas
Dive deeper into Gihong Choi's research on Nubint
Open this lab's papers in the app to read with AI, summarize, and cite in your writing.