ArticlePostepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology2022
Comparison of FFR, iFR, and QFR assessment in patients with severe aortic stenosis and coronary heart disease.
Article in Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Performance of Angiography-Derived Quantitative Flow Ratio: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Invasive Evaluation of Coronary Artery Disease in Severe Aortic Stenosis-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- The role of aortic valve area in the quantitative flow ratio-fractional flow reserve discrepancy in patients with coronary artery disease and severe aortic stenosis.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2025Article
- Comparison of outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with small and large Medtronic Evolut R and Evolut PRO self-expandable prosthetic valves.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2023Article
- The Impact of Age on the Physiological Assessment of Borderline Coronary Stenoses.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Prognostic value of quantitative flow ratio in patients with coronary heart disease after percutaneous coronary intervention therapy: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Some patients with coronary heart disease are diagnosed with severe aortic stenosis. For further treatment, coronary angiography is performed in these patients. For intermediate lesions, obtaining coronary artery physiological data can facilitate clinical decision-making regarding revascularization. Aim: The study compared the physiological significance of coronary artery stenosis using the fractional flow reserve (FFR) method with instantaneous wave-free pressure ratio (iFR) and quantitative flow ratio (QFR) in patients qualified for aortic valve replacement. Material and methods: Data were collected on patients hospitalized in the years 2019-2020 at the 2 Results: Twelve patients with severe aortic stenosis and borderline lesions in the coronary artery were qualified for physiological assessment. There were 6 women, whose mean age was 73.8 ±7.5 years. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 52 ±15%. The mean aortic valve area was 0.80 ±0.16 cm Conclusions: Despite the controversy and uncertainty of some operators regarding the interpretation of the FFR test in patients with severe aortic stenosis, we obtained complete agreement of FFR with iFR assessment. This fact suggests that in patients with severe aortic stenosis the choice of an invasive method to assess the physiological significance of the stenosis in the coronary artery is not crucial - both iFR and FFR allow comparable results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.