Trial reportClinical interventions in aging2016
Efficacy and safety outcomes of fractional flow reserve in guiding clinical therapy of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction compared with angiography alone in elderly Chinese patients.
Trial report in Clinical interventions in aging, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of intravascular imaging, physiological assessment and angiography for coronary revascularization in acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Updated meta-analysis of fractional flow reserve versus coronary angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Impact of percutaneous coronary intervention with different guidance modalities in patients with coronary artery lesions: a network meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical Outcomes Following Hemodynamic Parameter or Intravascular Imaging-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the Era of Drug-Eluting Stents: An Updated Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of 28 Randomized Trials and 11,860 Patients.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Comparative effectiveness and outcomes of physiology- and imaging-guided PCI: an evidence synthesis and network meta-analysis of FFR, iFR, OCT, and IVUS.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Fractional flow reserve use in coronary artery revascularization: A systematic review and meta-analysis.iScience · 2023Article
- Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Coronary Revascularization: Evidence from Randomized and Non-Randomized Studies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Comparison of Six Different Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance Modalities.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022Review
- Prediction of 3D Cardiovascular hemodynamics before and after coronary artery bypass surgery via deep learning.Communications biology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFractional flow reserve (FFR) is an innovative method for evaluating the physiological significance of a coronary stenosis, but its validity is less certain in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). It is important to assess whether FFR is effective and safe in patients, especially elderly Chinese patients, with NSTEMI. As the first one in China, the purpose of this study was to establish the efficacy and safety outcomes of FFR in guiding clinical therapy of NSTEMI compared with angiography alone in elderly Chinese patients. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis prospective randomized controlled study included 220 patients with NSTEMI older than 65 years. Patients were assigned in a ratio of 1:1 to the FFR-guided group and the angiography-guided group, and their outcomes were evaluated after 1 year of follow-up.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 70±3.6 years, and 69.6% were men. Baseline characteristics of the patients had no differences between the two groups (
conclusionCompared with angiography-guided standard therapy, FFR reduced the application of percutaneous coronary intervention and obtained similar outcomes, demonstrating that FFR was effective and safe in guiding clinical therapy of NSTEMI in elderly Chinese patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.