Eleni Karapedi

Dr. Eleni Karapedi


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

5Years (2022-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Evangelos KoustasEvangelos Koustas
Evangelos Koustas
ETEleni-Myrto Trifylli
Eleni-Myrto Trifylli
Panagiotis SarantisPanagiotis Sarantis
Panagiotis Sarantis
NPNikolaos Papadopoulos
Nikolaos Papadopoulos
EKEleni Karapedi
Eleni Karapedi
Athanasios G. PapavassiliouAthanasios G. Papavassiliou
Athanasios G. Papavassiliou
Gastrointestinal (GI) cancer constitutes a highly lethal entity among malignancies in the last decades and is still a major challenge for cancer therapeutic options. Despite the current combinational treatment strategies, including chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy, and targeted therapies, the survival rates remain notably low for patients with advanced disease. A better knowledge of the molecular mechanisms that influence tumor progression and the development of optimal therapeutic strategies for GI malignancies are urgently needed. Currently, the development and the assessment of the efficacy of immunotherapeutic agents in GI cancer are in the spotlight of several clinical trials. Thus, several new modalities and combinational treatments with other anti-neoplastic agents have been identified and evaluated for their efficiency in cancer management, including immune checkpoint inhibitors, adoptive cell transfer, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy, cancer vaccines, and/or combinations thereof. Understanding the interrelation among the tumor microenvironment, cancer progression, and immune resistance is pivotal for the optimal therapeutic management of all gastrointestinal solid tumors. This review will shed light on the recent advances and future directions of immunotherapy for malignant tumors of the GI system.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SKSotirios Kotoulas
Sotirios Kotoulas
ATAndreas S Triantafyllis
Andreas S Triantafyllis
NKNestoras Kontogiannis
Nestoras Kontogiannis
PTPavlos Tsinivizov
Pavlos Tsinivizov
KAKonstantinos Antoniades
Konstantinos Antoniades
LPLeonidas E Poulimenos
Leonidas E Poulimenos
Background: Radiation exposure in the cardiac catheterization laboratory remains a critical occupational hazard for interventional cardiologists and staff, contributing to orthopedic injuries, cataracts, and malignancy. In parallel, procedural complexity continues to increase, demanding both precision and safety. Robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention (R-PCI), alongside advanced shielding systems and imaging integration, has emerged as a transformative strategy to minimize radiation and enhance operator ergonomics. Objective: This state-of-the-art review synthesizes the current clinical evidence and technological advances that support a radiation-reduction paradigm in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), with a particular focus on the role of R-PCI platforms, procedural modifications, and emerging shielding technologies. Methods: We reviewed published clinical trials, registries, and experimental studies evaluating robotic PCI platforms, contrast and radiation dose metrics, ergonomic implications, procedural efficiency, and radiation shielding systems. Emphasis was given to the integration of CT-based imaging (coronary computed tomography angiography—CCTA, fractional flow reserve computed tomography—FFR-CT) and low-dose acquisition protocols. Results: R-PCI demonstrated technical success rates of 81–100% and clinical success rates up to 100% in both standard and complex lesions, with significant reductions in operator radiation exposure (up to 95%) and procedural ergonomic burden. Advanced shielding technologies offer radiation dose reductions ranging from 86% to nearly 100%, while integration of (CCTA), (FFR-CT), and Artificial Intelligence (AI) -assisted procedural mapping facilitates further fluoroscopy minimization. Robotic workflows, however, remain limited by lack of device compatibility, absence of haptic feedback, and incomplete integration of physiology and imaging tools. Conclusions: R-PCI, in combination with shielding technologies and imaging integration, marks a shift towards safer, radiation-minimizing interventional strategies. This transition reflects not only a technical evolution but a philosophical redefinition of safety, precision, and sustainability in modern interventional cardiology.

29 October 2026 in Preprints.org
Verified
Preprint
Open access
PDF file
SKSotirios Kotoulas
Sotirios Kotoulas
ATAndreas S Triantafyllis
Andreas S Triantafyllis
AKAthanasios C. Kotoulas
Athanasios C. Kotoulas
Nikolaos TsiamisNikolaos Tsiamis
Nikolaos Tsiamis
EKEleni Karapedi
Eleni Karapedi
LPLeonidas E Poulimenos
Leonidas E Poulimenos
Coronary artery calcification is common in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); it impairs device delivery and stent expansion and predicts stent failure. Balloon-based techniques (non-compliant, super high-pressure, cutting and scoring balloons, intravascular lithotripsy), rotational and orbital atherectomy, and excimer laser coronary atherectomy are now widely available. This narrative review describes the mechanism of each technique, the calcium morphology it suits on intravascular imaging, and its advantages and limitations, and synthesizes the randomized trials published between 2018 and 2026, including their longer-term follow-up. Dedicated calcium modification improves procedural success compared with balloon-only strategies in selected calcified lesions, but no trial has shown fewer deaths or myocardial infarctions; the only trial powered for a clinical endpoint comparing preparation strategies found no benefit from routine orbital atherectomy. Head-to-head comparisons were powered for imaging surrogates and mostly found the techniques non-inferior to one another. Intravascular imaging guidance is associated with larger stent areas and fewer adverse events. We also review technique-specific complications and their percutaneous management, and the evidence on performing these procedures in centers without on-site cardiac surgery. Finally, we propose a lesion-based, imaging-guided approach to technique selection and outline the trials still needed.