ReviewJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2024
Coronary Physiology to Guide Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Why, When, and How.
Review in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Invasive Coronary Physiology in Contemporary Practice: From Lesion Selection to Comprehensive PCI Guidance and Functional Phenotyping.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Novel Non-Hyperemic Coronary Physiology Indices for Vessel Longitudinal Analysis.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over most of the history of interventional cardiology, it has been tacitly assumed that once flow-limiting coronary disease had been documented, angiography was sufficient to plan percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and, subsequently, to decide if an optimal procedural result had been achieved. This view has been challenged by recent studies evaluating the results of PCI with fractional flow reserve and nonhyperemic pressure ratios. Evidence has accumulated showing that suboptimal functional PCI results occur frequently despite a good angiographic result and that they are associated with worse patient outcomes. In this article, we discuss how available coronary physiology tools, either guide wire or image-based, may address this problem by facilitating better procedural planning and PCI precision and optimization.
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.