Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33995587›Full record

ReviewEuropean cardiology2021

Optimal Prognostication of Patients with Coronary Stenoses in the Pre- and Post-PCI setting: Comments on TARGET FFR and DEFINE-FLOW Trials Presented at TCT Connect 2020.

Andreas Seitz, Stefan Baumann, Udo Sechtem, Peter Ong

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 48% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andreas SeitzDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology, Robert-Bosch-Krankenhaus Stuttgart, Germany.
Stefan BaumannDepartment of Cardiology, Pneumology and Angiology, University Hospital Mannheim Mannheim, Germany.
Udo SechtemDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology, Robert-Bosch-Krankenhaus Stuttgart, Germany.
Peter OngDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology, Robert-Bosch-Krankenhaus Stuttgart, Germany.
Robert Bosch Hospital · DEHeidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The body of evidence for the use of coronary physiology assessments to guide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been growing continuously in recent decades. Two studies presented during TCT Connect 2020 added insights into the prognostic value of coronary physiology measurements in pre- and post-PCI settings. The first study, TARGET FFR, assessed whether a post-PCI fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided incremental optimisation strategy (PIOS) was superior to angiography-guided PCI. The second study, DEFINE-FLOW, assessed the course of stenoses with fractional and coronary flow reserve (FFR+/CFR-) discordance when treated medically. This article summarises the main results from the TARGET FFR and the DEFINE-FLOW trials and puts them into the context of the existing literature.

Indexed as

Coronary flow reservecoronary physiologyfractional flow reserveintermediate stenosismicrovascular dysfunctionpost-percutaneous coronary interventionprognosis

Identifiers

PMID33995587
PMCPMC8117135
OpenAlexW3159761637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.