SynthesisJournal of the American Heart Association2024
Differential Effect of Aortic Valve Replacement for Severe Aortic Stenosis on Hyperemic and Resting Epicardial Coronary Pressure Indices.
Synthesis in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- How to Individualize Coronary Assessment and Revascularization in Severe AS Patients Undergoing TAVI in the Era of Lifetime Management?Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Negative expansion resistance (NER) phenomenon predicts hemodynamically non-significant coronary lesions.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Management of Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis.Korean circulation journal · 2025Review
- Physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: are we there yet?European heart journal open · 2025Article
- Combined Minimally Invasive Surgical and Percutaneous Approaches for a Patient on Hemodialysis With Severe Aortic Stenosis and Complex Coronary Artery Disease.Case reports in cardiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCoronary pressure indices to assess coronary artery disease are currently underused in patients with aortic stenosis due to many potential physiological effects that might hinder their interpretation. Studies with varying sample sizes have provided us with conflicting results on the effect of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) on these indices. The aim of this meta-analysis was to study immediate and long-term effects of TAVR on fractional flow reserve (FFR) and nonhyperemic pressure ratios (NHPRs). METHODS AND
resultsLesion-specific coronary pressure data were extracted from 6 studies, resulting in 147 lesions for immediate change in FFR analysis and 105 for NHPR analysis. To investigate the long-term changes, 93 lesions for FFR analysis and 68 for NHPR analysis were found. Lesion data were pooled and compared with paired
conclusionsTAVR resulted in small significant, but opposite, changes in FFR and NHPR. Using the standard cut-offs in patients with severe aortic stenosis, FFR might underestimate the physiological significance of a coronary lesion while NHPRs might overestimate its significance. The described changes only play a clinically relevant role in borderline lesions. Therefore, even in patients with aortic stenosis, an overtly positive or negative physiological assessment can be trusted.
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.