World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
86
Citations
32844
World Ranking
13961
National Ranking
7084

David E. Kandzari publication distribution in Medicine in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Medicine in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where David E. Kandzari sits on this spectrum.

101–120 publications: 5 scientists 121–140 publications: 26 scientists 141–160 publications: 73 scientists 161–180 publications: 155 scientists 181–200 publications: 230 scientists 201–220 publications: 363 scientists 221–240 publications: 487 scientists 241–260 publications: 545 scientists 261–280 publications: 722 scientists 281–300 publications: 768 scientists 301–320 publications: 834 scientists 321–340 publications: 895 scientists 341–360 publications: 922 scientists 361–380 publications: 838 scientists 381–400 publications: 861 scientists 401–420 publications: 918 scientists 421–440 publications: 806 scientists 441–460 publications: 771 scientists 461–480 publications: 751 scientists 481–500 publications: 713 scientists 501–520 publications: 617 scientists 521–540 publications: 611 scientists 541–560 publications: 537 scientists 561–580 publications: 504 scientists 581–600 publications: 509 scientists 601–620 publications: 396 scientists 621–640 publications: 386 scientists 641–660 publications: 371 scientists 661–680 publications: 340 scientists 681–700 publications: 336 scientists 701–720 publications: 307 scientists 721–740 publications: 259 scientists 741–760 publications: 230 scientists 761–780 publications: 228 scientists 781–800 publications: 217 scientists 801–820 publications: 204 scientists 821–840 publications: 186 scientists 841–860 publications: 177 scientists 861–880 publications: 155 scientists 881–900 publications: 139 scientists 901–920 publications: 145 scientists 921–940 publications: 116 scientists 941–960 publications: 133 scientists 961–980 publications: 91 scientists 981–1,000 publications: 96 scientists 1,001–1,020 publications: 77 scientists 1,021–1,040 publications: 70 scientists 1,041–1,060 publications: 63 scientists 1,061–1,080 publications: 77 scientists 1,081–1,100 publications: 49 scientists 1,101–1,120 publications: 54 scientists 1,121–1,140 publications: 49 scientists 1,141–1,160 publications: 51 scientists 1,161–1,180 publications: 35 scientists 1,181–1,200 publications: 39 scientists 1,201–1,220 publications: 26 scientists 1,221–1,240 publications: 37 scientists 1,241–1,260 publications: 36 scientists 1,261–1,280 publications: 27 scientists 1,281–1,300 publications: 32 scientists 1,301–1,320 publications: 28 scientists 1,321–1,340 publications: 17 scientists 1,341–1,360 publications: 30 scientists 1,361–1,380 publications: 28 scientists 1,381–1,400 publications: 17 scientists 1,401–1,420 publications: 21 scientists 1,421–1,440 publications: 15 scientists 1,441–1,460 publications: 12 scientists 1,461–1,480 publications: 12 scientists 1,481–1,500 publications: 18 scientists 1,501–1,520 publications: 14 scientists 1,521–1,540 publications: 17 scientists 1,541–1,560 publications: 15 scientists 1,561–1,580 publications: 6 scientists 1,581–1,600 publications: 2 scientists 1,601–1,620 publications: 12 scientists 1,621–1,640 publications: 11 scientists 1,641–1,660 publications: 8 scientists 1,661–1,680 publications: 5 scientists 1,681–1,700 publications: 5 scientists 1,701–1,720 publications: 10 scientists 1,721–1,740 publications: 12 scientists 1,741–1,760 publications: 14 scientists 1,761–1,780 publications: 6 scientists 1,781–1,795 publications: 5 scientists 1,796+ publications: 100 scientists
101 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 600 publications — 72nd percentile

72% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more.

David E. Kandzari D-index placement in Medicine in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Medicine scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where David E. Kandzari sits on this spectrum.

70–71 D-Index: 226 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 391 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 574 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 730 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 891 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 972 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 1,027 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 1,003 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 960 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 970 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 922 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 839 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 808 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 779 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 668 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 611 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 630 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 513 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 541 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 445 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 429 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 400 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 393 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 318 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 302 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 287 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 255 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 256 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 252 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 230 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 179 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 168 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 163 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 159 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 134 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 134 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 118 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 109 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 106 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 74 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 79 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 80 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 87 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 57 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 74 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 69 scientists 162–163 D-Index: 60 scientists 164–165 D-Index: 53 scientists 166–167 D-Index: 39 scientists 168–169 D-Index: 42 scientists 170–171 D-Index: 32 scientists 172–173 D-Index: 39 scientists 174–175 D-Index: 40 scientists 176–177 D-Index: 28 scientists 178–179 D-Index: 19 scientists 180–181 D-Index: 23 scientists 182–183 D-Index: 31 scientists 184–185 D-Index: 18 scientists 186–187 D-Index: 20 scientists 188–189 D-Index: 22 scientists 190–191 D-Index: 13 scientists 192–193 D-Index: 21 scientists 194–195 D-Index: 12 scientists 196–197 D-Index: 12 scientists 198–199 D-Index: 14 scientists 200–201 D-Index: 15 scientists 202–203 D-Index: 13 scientists 204–205 D-Index: 10 scientists 206–207 D-Index: 8 scientists 208–209 D-Index: 4 scientists 210–211 D-Index: 12 scientists 212–213 D-Index: 11 scientists 214–215 D-Index: 10 scientists 216 D-Index: 4 scientists 217+ D-Index: 98 scientists
70 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 86 D-Index — 31st percentile

31% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more.

Overview

David E. Kandzari is affiliated with Piedmont Atlanta Hospital in the United States. Their research contributions are primarily in the field of medicine, with a focus on cardiology and cardiovascular medicine. They have authored numerous articles covering surgical techniques, radiology, pulmonary and respiratory medicine, and aspects of psychiatry and mental health.

The scientist's work centers around key topics including:

  • Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
  • Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Antiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
  • Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
  • Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
  • Migraine and Headache Studies
  • Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments

David E. Kandzari has published extensively in several prominent journals, including:

  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
  • Journal of Hypertension
  • Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine
  • Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Kandzari include Felix Mahfoud, Roland E. Schmieder, Michael Böhm, Michael A. Weber, and Gregg W. Stone.

Some of Kandzari's notable recent papers are:

  • Efficacy of catheter-based renal denervation in the absence of antihypertensive medications (SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Pivotal): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial (2020, The Lancet)
  • Polymer-based or Polymer-free Stents in Patients at High Bleeding Risk (2020, New England Journal of Medicine)
  • Definitions and Clinical Trial Design Principles for Coronary Artery Chronic Total Occlusion Therapies: CTO-ARC Consensus Recommendations (2021, Circulation)
  • Long-term efficacy and safety of renal denervation in the presence of antihypertensive drugs (SPYRAL HTN-ON MED): a randomised, sham-controlled trial (2022, The Lancet)
  • Global Chronic Total Occlusion Crossing Algorithm (2021, Journal of the American College of Cardiology)

The research output of David E. Kandzari reflects a consistent focus on cardiovascular interventions, diagnostic methodologies, and clinical trial development, contributing to the broader understanding of hypertension management, coronary artery disease, and interventional cardiology.

Best Publications

  • A Controlled Trial of Renal Denervation for Resistant Hypertension

    Deepak L. Bhatt;David E. Kandzari;John M. Flack;Barry T. Katzen

  • Twelve or 30 months of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stents.

    Laura Mauri;Dean J. Kereiakes;Robert W. Yeh;Priscilla Driscoll-Shempp

  • Standard- vs high-dose clopidogrel based on platelet function testing after percutaneous coronary intervention: the GRAVITAS randomized trial.

    Matthew J. Price;Peter B. Berger;Paul S. Teirstein;Jean-François Tanguay

  • Standard- vs High-Dose Clopidogrel Based on Platelet Function Testing After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

    Matthew J. Price;Peter B. Berger;Paul S. Teirstein;Dominick J. Angiolillo

  • Everolimus-Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

    Gregg W. Stone;Joseph F. Sabik;Patrick W. Serruys;Charles A. Simonton

  • Percutaneous recanalization of chronically occluded coronary arteries: a consensus document: part II.

    Gregg W. Stone;David E. Kandzari;Roxana Mehran;Antonio Colombo

  • Effect of renal denervation on blood pressure in the presence of antihypertensive drugs: 6-month efficacy and safety results from the SPYRAL HTN-ON MED proof-of-concept randomised trial

    David E Kandzari;Michael Böhm;Felix Mahfoud;Felix Mahfoud;Raymond R Townsend

  • Catheter-based renal denervation in patients with uncontrolled hypertension in the absence of antihypertensive medications (SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED): a randomised, sham-controlled, proof-of-concept trial

    Raymond R Townsend;Felix Mahfoud;Felix Mahfoud;David E Kandzari;Kazuomi Kario

  • A Percutaneous Treatment Algorithm for Crossing Coronary Chronic Total Occlusions

    Emmanouil S. Brilakis;J. Aaron Grantham;Stéphane Rinfret;R. Michael Wyman

  • Five-Year Outcomes after PCI or CABG for Left Main Coronary Disease

    Gregg W. Stone;A. Pieter Kappetein;Joseph F. Sabik;Stuart J. Pocock

  • Predictors of blood pressure response in the SYMPLICITY HTN-3 trial.

    David E Kandzari;Deepak L Bhatt;Sandeep Kaur Brar;Chandan M Devireddy

  • Efficacy of catheter-based renal denervation in the absence of antihypertensive medications (SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Pivotal): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial

    Michael Böhm;Kazuomi Kario;David E. Kandzari;Felix Mahfoud;Felix Mahfoud

  • Effects of Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 Antibodies in Adults With Hypercholesterolemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

    Eliano Pio Navarese;Michalina Kołodziejczak;Volker Schulze;Paul A. Gurbel

  • Catheter‐Based Renal Denervation for Resistant Hypertension: Rationale and Design of the SYMPLICITY HTN‐3 Trial

    David E. Kandzari;Deepak L. Bhatt;Paul A. Sobotka;William W. O'Neill

  • Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with native coronary artery disease: a randomized controlled trial.

    David E. Kandzari;Martin B. Leon;Jeffrey J. Popma;Peter J. Fitzgerald

  • The transradial approach to percutaneous coronary intervention: historical perspective, current concepts, and future directions.

    Sunil V. Rao;Mauricio G. Cohen;David E. Kandzari;Olivier F. Bertrand

  • Guiding Principles for Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Global Expert Consensus Document

    Emmanouil S. Brilakis;Kambis Mashayekhi;Etsuo Tsuchikane;Nidal Abi Rafeh

  • Development and Validation of a Novel Scoring System for Predicting Technical Success of Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: The PROGRESS CTO (Prospective Global Registry for the Study of Chronic Total Occlusion Intervention) Score.

    Georgios Christopoulos;David E. Kandzari;Robert W. Yeh;Farouc A. Jaffer

  • Ultrathin, bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus thin, durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation (BIOFLOW V): a randomised trial

    David E Kandzari;Laura Mauri;Jacques J Koolen;Joseph M Massaro

  • Clopidogrel use and long-term clinical outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation. Commentary

    Eric L. Eisenstein;Kevin J. Anstrom;David F. Kong;Linda K. Shaw

Frequent Co-Authors

Gregg W. Stone
Gregg W. Stone Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
Emmanouil S. Brilakis
Emmanouil S. Brilakis Abbott Northwestern Hospital
Patrick W. Serruys
Patrick W. Serruys University of Galway
Ajay J. Kirtane
Ajay J. Kirtane Columbia University
Roxana Mehran
Roxana Mehran Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
Martin B. Leon
Martin B. Leon Columbia University Medical Center
Jeffrey W. Moses
Jeffrey W. Moses Columbia University Medical Center
Joseph F. Sabik
Joseph F. Sabik University Hospitals of Cleveland
Stephan Windecker
Stephan Windecker University of Bern
Barry F. Uretsky
Barry F. Uretsky University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

If you’re considering a future in medicine or healthcare, there are many flexible online degree options in the United States. For current Registered Nurses looking to advance their qualifications, rn to bsn online programs offer a convenient way to earn a bachelor’s degree while balancing work and family obligations.

Not a nurse yet? Some students pursue online direct entry msn programs, which allow those with a non-nursing bachelor’s degree to fast-track their entry into nursing at a graduate level.

Alternatively, you can explore direct admit nursing programs for an accessible route to begin nursing education without excessive prerequisites or complicated admissions processes.

For anyone interested in the administrative side of healthcare, there are accredited medical billing and coding schools with financial aid that provide in-demand skills and important industry certifications—entirely online.

Exploring these related pathways can help you find the best fit for your career goals in medicine or allied health fields.

Best Scientists Citing David E. Kandzari

Trending Scientists