Observational studyHeart and vessels2021
Independent predictors of discordance between the resting full-cycle ratio and fractional flow reserve.
Observational study in Heart and vessels, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic Performance of Non-Hyperemic Pressure Ratios Versus Fractional Flow Reserve Stratified by Coronary Artery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Pooled it
- Clinical Impact of Concordant and Discordant Physiology Parameters Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the EASY-PREDICT Study.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025Trial
- Interpretation of Discordance Between Non-Hyperemic Pressure Ratios and Fractional Flow Reserve: Potential Mechanisms and Clinical Implications.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Comparison of Nitroglycerin-Induced Pressure Ratio Drop and Resting Full-Cycle Ratio in a Pressure Wire Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Observational
- Comparison of Fractional Flow Reserve and Resting Full-Cycle Ratio in the Functional Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenosis in Patients with Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of diastolic pressure ratio using a pressure microcatheter for intracoronary physiological assessment.Heart and vessels · 2023Observational
- Cardiovascular events in patients with deferred lesions and chronic kidney disease.Heart and vessels · 2023Article
- Hyperemic and non-hyperemic indexes in coronary physiology. Causes and implications of discordant results.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2023Article
- Predictors of discordance between fractional flow reserve (FFR) and diastolic pressure ratio (dPR) in intermediate coronary lesions.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2023Article
- Adjusting RFR by Predictors of Disagreement, "The Adjusted RFR": An Alternative Methodology to Improve the Diagnostic Capacity of Coronary Indices.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2022Article
- Differential Impact of Renal Function on the Diagnostic Performance of Resting Full-Cycle Ratio in Patients With Renal Dysfunction.Circulation reports · 2022Article
- Potential value of saline-induced Pd/Pa ratio in patients with coronary artery stenosis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Clinical assessment of resting full-cycle ratio and fractional flow reserve for coronary artery disease in a real-world cohort.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- The impact of coronary microvascular dysfunction on the discordance between fractional flow reserve and resting full-cycle ratio in patients with chronic coronary syndromes.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Effect of Elevated Left Ventricular End Diastolic Pressure on Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve Discordance.Cardiology research · 2021Article
- Comparison of Resting Full-Cycle Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve in a German Real-World Cohort.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The resting full-cycle ratio (RFR), a novel resting index, is well correlated with and shows good diagnostic accuracy to the fractional flow reserve (FFR). However, discordance results between the RFR and FFR have been observed to occur in about 20% of cases. This study aimed to clarify the prevalence and factors of discordant results between the RFR and FFR through a direct comparison of these values in daily clinical practice. A total of 220 intermediate coronary lesions of 156 consecutive patients with RFR and FFR measurements were allocated to four groups according to RFR and FFR cutoff values. We compared the angiographic, clinical, and hemodynamic variables among the groups. Discordant results between the RFR and FFR were observed in 19.6% of vessels, and the proportion of discordant results was significantly higher in the left main trunk and left anterior descending artery (LM + LAD) than in non-LAD vessels (25.2% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.006). In the multivariable regression analysis, LM + LAD location, hemodialysis, and peripheral artery disease were associated with a low RFR among patients with a high FFR. Conversely, the absence of diabetes mellitus and the presence of higher hemoglobin levels were associated with a higher RFR among patients with a low FFR. Specific angiographic and clinical characteristics such as LM + LAD location, hemodialysis, peripheral artery disease, and absence of diabetes mellitus and anemia can be independent predictors of physiologic discordance between the RFR and FFR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33398440What 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.