Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34025094›Full record

ReviewThe International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc2021

Functional Assessment of Coronary Artery Lesions-Old and New Kids on the Block.

Prashant Patel, Ravi Rao, Prabhdeep Sethi, Ashis Mukherjee, Padmini Varadarajan, Ramdas G Pai

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Prashant PatelDepartment of Cardiology, St. Bernardine Medical Center, San Bernardino, California.
Ravi RaoDepartment of Cardiology, St. Bernardine Medical Center, San Bernardino, California.
Prabhdeep SethiDepartment of Cardiology, St. Bernardine Medical Center, San Bernardino, California.
Ashis MukherjeeDepartment of Cardiology, St. Bernardine Medical Center, San Bernardino, California.
Padmini VaradarajanDepartment of Cardiology, St. Bernardine Medical Center, San Bernardino, California.
Ramdas G PaiDepartment of Cardiology, St. Bernardine Medical Center, San Bernardino, California.ORCID 0000-0001-8188-3869

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Angiography is inaccurate in assessing functional significance of coronary lesions, and often stenoses deemed severe on angiographic assessment do not restrict coronary blood flow at rest or with maximal dilatation. Angiography-guided revascularization has not shown improvement in hard clinical outcomes in stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). Most current guidelines for SIHD recommend invasive functional assessment of lesions to guide revascularization if prior evidence of ischemia is not available. There has been several recent advances and development of novel methods in this arena. Various contemporary clinical trials have been undertaken for validation of these indices. Here we review the physiological basis, tools, techniques, and evidence base for various invasive (resting as well as hyperemic) and noninvasive methods for functional assessment of coronary lesions. Left main stenosis, bifurcation lesions, serial stenosis, and acute coronary syndrome each causes unique disequilibrium that may affect measurements and require special considerations for accurate functional assessment.

Indexed as

angioplastycoronary artery diseasecoronary stenosisfunctional significanceperfusion

Identifiers

PMID34025094
PMCPMC8128490

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.