Trial reportHeart and vessels2018
Intravenous nicorandil versus adenosine for fractional flow reserve measurement: a crossover, randomized study.
Trial report in Heart and vessels, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical outcomes following fractional flow reserve-guided revascularization using nicorandil versus conventional hyperemic agents: insights from the J-PRIDE Registry.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Nicorandil as a promising therapeutic option for ventricular arrhythmia: A case report and review of literature.World journal of cardiology · 2024Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of diastolic pressure ratio using a pressure microcatheter for intracoronary physiological assessment.Heart and vessels · 2023Observational
- Coronary Flow Reserve and Glycemic Variability in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2021Article
- Clinical feasibility of resting full-cycle ratio as a unique non-hyperemic index of invasive functional lesion assessment.Heart and vessels · 2020Observational
- Regional layer-specific longitudinal peak systolic strain using exercise stress two-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography for the detection of functionally significant coronary artery disease.Heart and vessels · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nicorandil has vasodilatory effects on both the epicardial coronary arteries and the coronary microvasculature, thereby increasing coronary blood flow. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of intravenous (IV) nicorandil infusion for fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement. In this crossover randomized study, 49 patients underwent FFR measurement with a consecutive randomized order of patient-blind infusions of continuous IV adenosine administration and a single bolus IV administration of nicorandil. The primary endpoint was the difference between the FFR by nicorandil and the FFR by adenosine, as assessed by the Bland-Altman method. The mean FFR value measured by nicorandil was not significantly different from that measured by adenosine [0.8125 ± 0.1349 vs. 0.7978 ± 0.124; mean difference, 0.0147 (95% confidence interval - 0.0373, 0.0667); P = 0.58]. There was no clinically significant diagnostic discordance, with the FFR by nicorandil > 0.80 and that by adenosine < 0.75. Hyperemia was achieved earlier using nicorandil than adenosine (34 ± 13 vs. 58 ± 15, P < 0.001). The duration of hyperemia after IV nicorandil was variable (6-570 s, mean 89 ± 98 s). IV nicorandil decreased systolic blood pressure by 32 ± 16 mm Hg (24 ± 10%) from baseline. Linear regression analysis showed that the average FFR value and the difference in systolic blood pressure were significantly associated with the bias in the FFR value between the two drugs. In conclusions, the results of the present study suggest that IV nicorandil can achieve maximal hyperemia easily and rapidly, providing an acceptable diagnostic performance for FFR assessment. However, a wide range of variation in hyperemic plateau and a decrease in blood pressure are the major limitations of this method.
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.