ArticleWorld journal of cardiology2018
Safety and efficacy of frequency-domain optical coherence tomography in evaluating and treating intermediate coronary lesions.
Article in World journal of cardiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- PCI Deferral Based on Fractional Flow Reserve or Optical Coherence Tomography: Two-Year Results of the Forza Trial.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo establish whether frequency-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT) is safe and effective in the evaluation and treatment of angiographically-intermediate coronary lesions (ICL).
methodsSixty-four patients with 2-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (2D-QCA) demonstrating ICL were included. OCT imaging was performed. According to predetermined OCT criteria, patients were assigned to either of 2 groups: OCT-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or OCT-guided optimal medical therapy (OMT). The primary efficacy endpoint was to demonstrate the superiority and higher accuracy of FD-OCT compared to 2D-QCA in evaluating stenosis severity in patients with ICL. The primary safety endpoint was the incidence of 30-d major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Secondary endpoints included MACE at 12 mo and other clinical events.
resultsAnalysis of the primary efficacy endpoint demonstrates that 2D-QCA overestimates the stenosis severity of ICL in both the OCT-guided PCI and OMT groups, proving FD-OCT to be superior to and more precise than 2D-QCA in treating this subset of lesions. The primary safety endpoint was fully met with the incidence of 30-d MACE being nil in both the OCT-guided PCI and OCT-guided OMT groups. Incidences of secondary endpoints were found to be low in both arms, the only exception being the relatively high incidence of recurrent episodes of angina which was, however, very similar in the 2 groups.
conclusionFD-OCT is safe and effective in the evaluation and treatment of ICL. Larger studies are needed to firmly establish the efficacy and safety of FD-OCT in treating ICL across all coronary artery disease population subgroups.
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.