ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2025
Prognostic Implication of Computational Angiography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Nonobstructive Coronary Artery Disease.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2025. 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.
- Machine learning to identify novel bleeding and residual thromboembolic risks in patients on anticoagulation.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Article
- Neuroprotective and Cognitive Benefits of a Ketogenic Diet in a Type 2 Diabetes Rat Model.Molecular neurobiology · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRisk stratification of patients with symptomatic nonobstructive coronary artery disease remains uncertain. Our study assessed the clinical value of single-vessel, multivessel, and 3-vessel computational angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (caFFR) measurement in patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease. METHODS AND
resultsWe enrolled patients with ≤50% stenosis with a caFFR value ≥0.8 in all 3 coronary arteries on coronary angiography. The sum of caFFR values in the 3 vessels was computed for each patient. Patient stratification was based on the median value of the following criteria: single-vessel analysis, multivessel analysis, and 3-vessel analysis. The primary end point of this study was major adverse cardiac events at 5 years, defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven revascularization. A total of 490 patients were included. The 5-year major adverse cardiac event rates in single-vessel analysis were statistically insignificant between low- and high-caFFR groups (left anterior descending artery [
conclusionsWe demonstrated that both multiple-vessel and 3-vessel caFFR measurements serve as valuable prognostic indicators for risk assessment in patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease.
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.