Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39081828›Full record

ReviewInterventional cardiology (London, England)2024

After RIPCORD 2, FAME 3, FLOWER-MI and FUTURE: Has the Pressure Wire had its Day?

Bhavik Modi, Subhabrata Dutta, Damien Collison, Ioannis Lampadakis, Sayan Sen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Interventional cardiology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

5 authors.

Bhavik ModiGlenfield Hospital, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust Leicester, UK.
Subhabrata DuttaGlenfield Hospital, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust Leicester, UK.
Damien CollisonWest of Scotland Regional Heart and Lung Centre, Golden Jubilee National Hospital Glasgow, UK.
Ioannis LampadakisHammersmith Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust London, UK.
Sayan SenHammersmith Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent years have seen the publication of several high-profile, negative trials about pressure wires. This has coincided with a consistent increase in the ratio of angioplasty for acute coronary syndromes versus percutaneous coronary intervention in stable coronary artery disease, a greater use of intracoronary imaging during percutaneous coronary intervention and the continued evolution of computational fluid dynamics-derived estimations of fractional flow reserve from both CT and invasive coronary angiography. Consequently, many interventional cardiologists now wonder if the pressure wire will soon become obsolete. This head-to-head article provides a critical appraisal of recent trial data, discusses a potential evolution in how pressure wires are used and debates the motion that the device (and by extension, invasive assessment of coronary physiology) has now had its day.

Indexed as

fractional flow reserveischaemiapercutaneous coronary interventionPhysiology

Identifiers

PMID39081828
PMCPMC11287625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.