Trial reportClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2025
Quantitative flow ratio or angiography for the assessment of non-culprit lesions in acute coronary syndromes, a randomized trial.
Trial report in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT04808310 (QUantitative Flow Ratio Or Angiography for the assessMent of nOn-culprit Lesions), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
QUantitative Flow Ratio Or Angiography for the assessMent of nOn-culprit Lesions
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of intravascular imaging, physiological assessment and angiography for coronary revascularization in acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Quantitative Flow Ratio-Guided vs. Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of One-Year Clinical Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndromes often have multivessel disease (MVD). Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is an angiography-based technology that may help quantify the functional significance of non-culprit lesions, with the advantage that measurements are possible also once the patient is discharged from the catheterization laboratory.
aimOur two-center, randomized superiority trial aimed to test whether QFR, as compared to angiography, modifies the rate of non-culprit lesion interventions (primary functional endpoint) and improves the outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes and MVD (primary clinical endpoint).
methodsIn total, 202 consecutive patients (64 [56-71] years of age, 160 men) with STEMI (n = 69 (34%)), NSTEMI (n = 94 (47%)), or unstable angina (n = 39 (19%)) and MVD who had undergone successful treatment of all culprit lesions were randomized 1:1 to angiography- vs. QFR-guided delayed revascularization of 246 non-culprit stenoses (1.2/patient).
resultsThe proportion of patients assigned to percutaneous intervention was not different between groups (angiography group: 45 (45%) vs. QFR: 56 (55%), P = 0.125; relative risk = 0.80 (0.60-1.06)). At 12 months, a primary clinical endpoint event (composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, revascularization, and significant angina) occurred in 24 patients (angiography-guided) and 23 patients (QFR-guided; P = 0.637, HR = 1.16 [0.63-2.15]). None of its components was different between groups. DISCUSSION: QFR guidance based on analysis of images from the primary intervention was not associated with a difference in the rate of non-culprit lesion staged revascularization nor in the 12-month incidence of clinical events in patients with acute coronary syndromes and multivessel disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04808310).
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.