ArticleHeliyon2023
The prognostic value and economic benefits of coronary angiography-derived fractional flow reserve-guided strategy in patients with coronary artery disease.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of hemoglobin A1c management levels on coronary physiology evaluated by quantitative flow ratio in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention.Journal of diabetes investigation · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to investigate the prognostic value and economic benefit of coronary angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (caFFR) guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with coronary artery disease. Methods: All patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent coronary angiography in our center between April 2021 and November 2021 were retrospectively enrolled and divided into the caFFR guidance group (n = 160) and angiography guidance group (n = 211). A threshold of caFFR≤0.8 was used for revascularization. Otherwise, delayed PCI was preferred. The patients were prospectively followed up by telephone or outpatient service at six months for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) of all-cause death, myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. All in-hospital expenses were recorded, including initial hospitalization and re-hospitalization related to MACE. Results: There was no significant difference in the baseline characteristics between the two groups. There were 2 (1.2%) patients in the caFFR guidance group and 5 (2.4%) patients in the angiography guidance group with MACE events during the following six months. Compared with angiography guidance, caFFR guidance reduced the revascularization rate (63.7% vs. 84.4%, p = 0.000), the average length of stents implanted (0.52 ± 0.88 vs. 1.1 ± 1.4, Conclusion: Compared with coronary angiography guidance, caFFR guidance is of great significance in reducing revascularization and cost, which has significant health and economic benefits.
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.