ReviewHerz2018
[Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR®) in patients with coronary artery disease].
Review in Herz, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronary angiography is considered as the gold standard in the morphological representation of coronary artery stenosis. Coronary angiography is often performed without preprocedural non-invasive proof of ischemia and the assessment of the severity of a coronary lesion by morphology is very subjective. Thus, invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement represents the current standard for estimation of the hemodynamic relevance of coronary artery stenosis and facilitates decision making for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and stenting. The FFR-guided revascularization strategy has been classified as a class IA recommendation in the 2014 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Both the DEFER and the FAME studies showed no treatment advantage of hemodynamically irrelevant stenosis. By use of FFR (and targeted interventions), clinical results could be improved as well as the procedure costs were reduced; however, the use in clinical practice is still limited due to the need of adenosine administration and a significant prolongation of the procedure. Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR®) is a new innovative approach for the determination of the hemodynamic relevance of coronary stenosis which can be obtained at rest without the use of vasodilators. Regarding periprocedural complications as well as prognosis, iFR® showed non-inferiority compared to FFR in the SWEDEHEART and DEFINE-FLAIR trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28835979What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.