ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Clinical Validation of a Novel Pressure Microcatheter-Based Nonhyperemic Pressure Ratio (SUPREME II Study).
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05417763 (Pressure Microcatheter for Physiological Measurements - A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Study), which is not on this 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.
Pressure Microcatheter for Physiological Measurements - A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Study
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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe constant resistance ratio (cRR) is a novel nonhyperemic pressure ratio based on piezoresistive pressure microcatheter (PMC) measurements. With repeated measurements in randomized order of PMC and pressure wire techniques, this study aimed primarily to validate the diagnostic performance of cRR compared with fractional flow reserve (FFR) in coronary lesions of 30% to 90% diameter stenosis.
methodsSUPREME II (Sensor-Equipped Ultrathin Pressure Microcatheter Versus Pressure Wire for Physiological Measurements) was a multicenter, prospective study that included 466 patients (483 vessels) from 11 centers. All target vessels were assessed using both pressure wire and PMC separately in randomized order under resting and hyperemic conditions. The primary end point was the diagnostic accuracy of the cRR using a PMC-based FFR of ≤0.80 as the reference standard. Secondary end points included the cRR "gray zone" of the cRR-FFR hybrid strategy and the proportion of patients in whom diagnosed was achieved without vasodilator use.
resultsThe optimal cRR cutoff was 0.89, which correctly classified 82.8% of the patients, with a sensitivity and specificity of 87.0% and 80.1%, respectively, and achieved an area under the curve of 0.92 with FFR
conclusionsIn coronary stenosis of 30% to 90% diameter stenosis, cRR measurements were highly feasible. The diagnostic accuracy of cRR with FFR REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05417763; Unique Identifier: NCT05417763.
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.