ArticleIndian heart journal2018
Physiological evaluation of the provisional side-branch intervention strategy for bifurcation lesions using instantaneous wave-free ratio.
Article in Indian heart journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Determining Clinical Profile of Parkinson's Disease Among Egyptian Population
Impact of Coronary Angioplasty on Non-hyperaemic Pressure Ratio in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Kissing Balloon-Stent Technique for Simple Bifurcation Lesions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Practical Application of Coronary Physiologic Assessment: Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Document: Part 2.JACC. Asia · 2023Review
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: Latest Evidence.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2020Review
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe provisional side-branch intervention strategy remains the gold standard approach for repair of coronary bifurcation lesions. We performed this study to evaluate the clinical and functional outcomes of using the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) for physiological assessment in provisional side-branch repair of bifurcation lesions.
methodsFifty patients with coronary bifurcation lesions were equally divided into two groups: (I) an iFR-guided side-branch intervention group and (II) a conventional group, in which the operator selected a different interventional method. After the procedure, we performed a six-month follow-up for postoperative ejection fraction (EF) and clinical cardiac outcomes.
resultsOur results showed that the iFR measurement procedure was technically feasible in bifurcation lesions, with no procedural-related complications. Moreover, measuring iFR significantly predicted the side-branch percent stenosis after stenting of the main branch (r = -0.81, p < 0.0001). Compared to the conventional group, the iFR-guided group showed a significantly shorter procedural time (MD = -14.6 min, 95% CI [-27.7, -1.4]) and hospital stay duration (MD = -0.92 days, 95% CI [-1.6, -0.28]). However, no significant differences were recorded between the iFR-guided and conventional groups in terms of postoperative EF (p = 0.9), six-month heart failure class (p = 0.89), or post-interventional angina (p = 0.066).
conclusionUsing iFR for physiological assessment during the provisional side-branch intervention strategy can reduce the procedural time and length of hospital stay in patients with bifurcation lesions. Larger trials should compare the clinical outcomes of iFR to other physiological assessment methods such as the fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients with coronary bifurcation lesions. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02785510.
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.