ArticleScientific reports2025
Real-world study to compare functional SYNTAX score versus anatomical SYNTAX score in influencing the treatment strategy for multivessel disease patients.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are limited prospective clinical studies that use the functional SYNTAX score (FSS) to determine treatment strategies, as compared to the anatomical SYNTAX score (ASS), in patients with multivessel disease (MVD). We sought to compare the change in treatment strategy and healthcare cost benefits between ASS and FSS in patients with chronic stable angina and/or recent acute coronary syndrome with MVD. This was a prospective, multicenter, multi-country, open-label study that enrolled 577 patients from 16 sites across Thailand, India, and Hong Kong. After angiographic assessment, the first treatment strategy was decided based on ASS information. Thereafter, the second treatment strategy was decided based on FSS. Subsequently, the physicians were asked to document the actual treatment received by the patient. The primary endpoint was a proportional change in treatment strategy based on FSS evaluated using κ-statistics and the Bowker-McNemar test. A total of 577 patients with 1833 lesions were assessed. The overall mean ASS was 17.0 ± 8.5, and the mean FSS score was 11.2 ± 9.6. FSS reclassified 28.1% of patients from the high-risk group toward the low-risk group. FSS reclassified more than one-third of patients with ASS > 22 to FSS ≤ 22. FSS-based decision making led to a statistically significant change (p < 0.0001) in treatment strategy for 53% of the patients. This change reduced the procedure-related cost by 10%. The overall major adverse cardiovascular events rate at 1-year follow-up was 4.5%. In the real-world setting, FSS significantly influenced the determination of appropriate treatment options among MVD patients and led to a reduction in procedure-related costs.
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.