Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34762151›Full record

ArticleHeart and vessels2022

Agreement between single plane and biplane derived angiographic fractional flow reserve in patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis.

Jiro Ando, Katharina Otani, Thomas Redel, Shun Minatsuki, Hironobu Kikuchi, Satoshi Kodera, Issei Komuro

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Heart and vessels, 2022. 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
–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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
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

7 authors.

Jiro AndoDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, The University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan. jandokkr@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5591-5297
Katharina OtaniAdvanced Therapies Innovation Department, Siemens Healthcare K.K, Gate City Osaki West Tower, 1-11-1 Osaki, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 114-8644, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2322-3405
Thomas RedelAdvanced Therapies Innovation Department, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Siemensstr. 1, 91301, Forchheim, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5172-9155
Shun MinatsukiDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, The University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9543-5503
Hironobu KikuchiDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, The University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.
Satoshi KoderaDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, The University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2908-6875
Issei KomuroDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, The University of Tokyo Hospital, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0714-7182

Funding

siemens healthcare k.k. (j) C00218592
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is often used to evaluate the physiological severity of intermediate coronary stenoses, but less-invasive assessment methods are desirable. We evaluated the feasibility of angiographic FFR (angioFFR) calculated from two projections acquired simultaneously by a biplane C-arm system and angioFFR calculated from two projections acquired independently by one plane of the same biplane C-arm system. AngioFFR was validated against FFR in terms of detection of hemodynamically relevant coronary artery stenoses. Twenty-two Patients who underwent angiography and FFR for coronary artery disease were included. We used a non-commercial prototype to calculate biplane angioFFR for 22 vessels (19 LAD, 1 LCx, 2 RCA) and single plane angioFFR for 17 of the same 22 vessels. FFR < 0.8 was measured in 8 vessels. The Pearson correlation coefficients with FFR were 0.55 for single plane angioFFR and 0.61 for biplane angioFFR and the diagnostic accuracies were 88% (95% CI 73-100%) for single plane angioFFR and 86% (95% CI 72-100%) for biplane angioFFR. Bland-Altman plots revealed that compared with FFR, the limits of agreement for single plane angioFFR were  - 0.07 to 0.19 (mean difference 0.06, p = 0.002) and the limits of agreement for biplane FFR were  - 0.09 to 0.15 (mean difference 0.03, p = 0.03). In conclusion, angioFFR calculated from single or biplane acquisitions by a biplane C-arm is feasible and may evolve to a tool for less invasive imaging-based assessment of myocardial ischemia.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseCoronary StenosisFractional Flow Reserve, MyocardialMyocardial IschemiaCoronary AngiographyCoronary VesselsHumansPredictive Value of TestsSeverity of Illness IndexAngiographic fractional flow reserveCoronary artery diseaseIntermediate stenosisMyocardial ischemia

Identifiers

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.