ArticlePloS one2026
Prognostic significance of residual functional SYNTAX score II in acute myocardial infarction.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundThe residual functional SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score (rFSS) predicts patient prognosis post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We aimed to integrate rFSS with clinical risk factors (rFSS-II) to comprehensively assess patient prognosis, guided by the quantitative flow ratio (QFR), and compare its predictive efficacy with other scoring systems.
methodsWe enrolled 175 acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients undergoing post-PCI physiological measurements. Three distinct models were established based on different calculation methods of rFSS-II, and their respective abilities to predict major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were evaluated. Patients were categorized into high rFSS-II (n = 70) and low rFSS-II (n = 105) groups. The MACE incidence was compared between these groups over a 3-year follow-up period, using multivariable Cox regression analysis to identify MACE predictors.
resultsHigh rFSS-II patients had more MACE than low rFSS-II patients (55.7% vs. 18.1%; p < 0.001). The rFSS-II model had higher accuracy than other traditional risk scores, except for rSS-II. In a multivariable-adjusted model, rFSS-II emerged as an independent predictor of MACE (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.08 per 1 unit increase, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.11, p < 0.001).
conclusionsQFR-guided rFSS-II proved to have good predictive value among AMI patients 3 years post-PCI. Calculating the total score of all vascular segments with QFR ≤ 0.80 may provide enhanced predictive capability.
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.